750 réponses à ce sujet

[cjones91]

addiction21 wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

I know how game development works and how things tend to get cut because of either time or resources.But how am I wrong when there is precedence for games having content removed solely for the sake of making a quick buck?The recent Metro game is a clear example of what happens when core game features are removed in order to be sold as DLC and if you think that's bad then just wait until the next gen fully comes around.

No you have made it clear you think you know how development works. You say you know but then argue as if its all like Capcom or Metro.

Your "precedence" is ignoring the many more examples of how its not done that way so you can pretend that is the only way DLC comes about.

Why should I wait till the next gen? I have been hearing this tripe all thru last gen that "DLC is bad because its DLC and reasons"

Like I have already said I will buy what I want if I believe its worth my money. Watching children making ignorant assumptions using extremes and double standards as to why they should get it for free I will continue to mock.

And I have already said I have no problems with DLC,but I'm not going to ignore the fact that it has been abused many times this gen either.

[Zoikster]

I guess my question would be; if the game is already playable (start to finish by the staff) why would any content be cut? They have plenty of time to polish whatever content they have.

[MDCT506]

Zoikster wrote...

I guess my question would be; if the game is already playable (start to finish by the staff) why would any content be cut? They have plenty of time to polish whatever content they have.

First off, what was actually said was...

1. The main storyline completely playable from beginning to end: This allows the story to be experienced in an interactive state, and lets us get pacing and spacing right.

Secondary content isn't mentioned as being complete or not and I imagine that this the area where things get cut from the game most often. 

[Fast Jimmy]

Zoikster wrote...

I guess my question would be; if the game is already playable (start to finish by the staff) why would any content be cut? They have plenty of time to polish whatever content they have.

Well, the main story is complete. That likely doesn't include companion content, side quests, or variations in dialogue or different situations. The main quest line in DA2 was maybe two dozen questlines. In a game like Skyrim, it is even less. 

So unless a companion is totally integral to the plot (like Allistair or Anders), their content won't be totally complete. 


That being said, the fact that the *almost* complete content that didn't make the cut but could be finished between the time the game goes gold has, by no intentional planning, been a companion (when Bioware as a brand is well known for their companions) is, to my eyes, questionable. If DA:I has D1DLC, it will be a companion. And I'd say it's quite likely that they know exactly what companion they know right now they will say they cannot complete in time and sell as separate DLC. 

Is that wrong? Not inherently. But I think acting like there isn't some level of intentionality and planning in this is possibly a little misleading. Not to mention a Day One patch was needed much more for some of Bioware's games than having the teams work on DLC. Glotching animations and unplayable quests in DA2, not to mention the face import but for ME3, show that maybe the team's should be focused on the existing base game instead of looking at creating and releasing new content the very day of release. 

Just my own perceptions. 

[Maverick827]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Not to mention a Day One patch was needed much more for some of Bioware's games than having the teams work on DLC. Glotching animations and unplayable quests in DA2, not to mention the face import but for ME3, show that maybe the team's should be focused on the existing base game instead of looking at creating and releasing new content the very day of release.

With the first two weeks of a game's launch being the most crucial, you're essentially throwing money away by releasing patches for non-critical bugs instead of DLC.  Only one of those two things generates money.

There might be an argument for releasing patches first to gain good will, but there are enough people who will post "LOL WAY TO FAIL" and not buy the game no matter how fast something is patched.

[Angrywolves]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Zoikster wrote...

I guess my question would be; if the game is already playable (start to finish by the staff) why would any content be cut? They have plenty of time to polish whatever content they have.

Well, the main story is complete. That likely doesn't include companion content, side quests, or variations in dialogue or different situations. The main quest line in DA2 was maybe two dozen questlines. In a game like Skyrim, it is even less. 

So unless a companion is totally integral to the plot (like Allistair or Anders), their content won't be totally complete. 


That being said, the fact that the *almost* complete content that didn't make the cut but could be finished between the time the game goes gold has, by no intentional planning, been a companion (when Bioware as a brand is well known for their companions) is, to my eyes, questionable. If DA:I has D1DLC, it will be a companion. And I'd say it's quite likely that they know exactly what companion they know right now they will say they cannot complete in time and sell as separate DLC. 

Is that wrong? Not inherently. But I think acting like there isn't some level of intentionality and planning in this is possibly a little misleading. Not to mention a Day One patch was needed much more for some of Bioware's games than having the teams work on DLC. Glotching animations and unplayable quests in DA2, not to mention the face import but for ME3, show that maybe the team's should be focused on the existing base game instead of looking at creating and releasing new content the very day of release. 

Just my own perceptions. 

sage jimmy is wise as usual.
Probably the most astute poster on the BSN.
We just hope they can avoid the BF4 type issues.No Bioware related lawsuits.Rotfl.

Sigrun rescued from the deep roads would be nice.
Jusrt a thought.

[Skorm777]

renjility wrote...

Skorm777 wrote...

renjility wrote...

ThisOnesUsername wrote...

All you idiots wanting Day One DLC are making my head hurt.

They should only start to consider D1DLC when there's not a single bug in the main game, as far as I'm concerned.

Programmers fix bugs. Animators, graphical designers, writers, and other specialised developers create dlc. Therefore what you're saying is just angsty fan whining; you're in the right place unfortunately. 

Yeah, and the programmers don't work on D1DLC, certainly. Considering I've just encountered several nasty bugs upon replaying DAO, they could have spent their time differently. Same goes for ME3. Time to develop D1DLC, yet the face import bug took week to fix after release.

What bugs were those? I just finished my first mage warden two weeks ago and completed several other playthroughs long before then; and haven't encountered any bugs that were notable enough to remember. 

As with Skyrim, half the bugs people complain about are products of their own meddling, be it through mods or the toolset. 

You say "they have time to develop D1DLC" yet you have no insight into whether or not they draw from the vanilla team, or use manpower from other sources. 

[Fast Jimmy]

Maverick827 wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Not to mention a Day One patch was needed much more for some of Bioware's games than having the teams work on DLC. Glotching animations and unplayable quests in DA2, not to mention the face import but for ME3, show that maybe the team's should be focused on the existing base game instead of looking at creating and releasing new content the very day of release.

With the first two weeks of a game's launch being the most crucial, you're essentially throwing money away by releasing patches for non-critical bugs instead of DLC.  Only one of those two things generates money.

There might be an argument for releasing patches first to gain good will, but there are enough people who will post "LOL WAY TO FAIL" and not buy the game no matter how fast something is patched.

If the philosophy is to cash in while you can while selling a semi-borken game, then I'd say that is a terrible philosophy. 

[addiction21]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

That being said, the fact that the *almost* complete content that didn't make the cut but could be finished between the time the game goes gold has, by no intentional planning, been a companion (when Bioware as a brand is well known for their companions) is, to my eyes, questionable. If DA:I has D1DLC, it will be a companion. And I'd say it's quite likely that they know exactly what companion they know right now they will say they cannot complete in time and sell as separate DLC. 

Except Shale is the only one I remember they stuck to that story about the companion not being finished so they could put out as DLC. All the rest were clearly marketed that they intended to be put out as some form of DLC.

But then Why should BIoWare as a brand known for their companions not try to sell that? Why should they not try to sell so sort of story content that goes beyond a random mission and zero real interaction with the rest of the game like Z and Kasumi?  Are you asking BioWare to shoot themselves in the foot?

Fast Jimmy wrote...


Is that wrong? Not inherently. But I think acting like there isn't some level of intentionality and planning in this is possibly a little misleading.

I am better then posting a face palm meme but its so very tempting. Of course there is some level of intentionality and planning or do you think they just wing it? <aybe with Shale but ME2, DA2, and ME3 it was made clear they were going to be extra DLC.

Fast Jimmy wrote...


If the philosophy is to cash in while you can while selling a semi-borken game, then I'd say that is a terrible philosophy. 

If "any bug" equals "semi-broken" then I have never played a game that was not "semi-broken."

[Zoikster]

MDCT506 wrote...

Zoikster wrote...

I guess my question would be; if the game is already playable (start to finish by the staff) why would any content be cut? They have plenty of time to polish whatever content they have.

First off, what was actually said was...

1. The main storyline completely playable from beginning to end: This allows the story to be experienced in an interactive state, and lets us get pacing and spacing right.

Secondary content isn't mentioned as being complete or not and I imagine that this the area where things get cut from the game most often. 

No need to get snippy <_< I was only asking a question. Thanks for the perceptive response Jimmy 

Edit: I assumed the secondary components could be easily completed by fall of 2014 if they were able to get DA2 out so quickly, which is why I asked the question.

Modifié par Zoikster, 23 décembre 2013 - 03:43 .

[Darth Death]

Skorm777 wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

But how does your solution solve anything? Assuming we do want to accept your interpretation where Bioware is behaving less than ideally, what's stopping them from selling the same content much later? Or simply not releasing the content period, since fans will demand it be attached to the base game? Getting Javik a month or two months later does not imply that Javik was made after the fact.

I also liked how skyrim's dlc was handled after its release, as an example.

Yeah, I like how Bethesda blatantly lied or exaggerated about many features in the game as well; and how they dummed everything down, so in every dungeon within the game we could do the same animal stone, or animal claw puzzle. 

My favorite parts about Skyrim dlc were all the reused textures with new names, and the incclusion of stories that will be made irrelevant since your part in them will either be ignored or decided for you in the next game. 

I'm not suggesting Bioware has done right on their dlc either, but praising Bethesda given the massive flaws just because their dlc release time was later, just shows hows childish you are. 

There are two things wrong with your statement:

1) I wasn't talking about the quality of dlc...

2) Nowhere in my post did I praise Bethesda; I'd praised projekt red. Liking the implementation of Skyrim's dlc doesn't equal praising Bethesda.  

The only child here is you since you couldn't comprehend what I said plainly.  

Modifié par Darth Death, 23 décembre 2013 - 03:45 .

[Skorm777]

Darth Death wrote...

Skorm777 wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

But how does your solution solve anything? Assuming we do want to accept your interpretation where Bioware is behaving less than ideally, what's stopping them from selling the same content much later? Or simply not releasing the content period, since fans will demand it be attached to the base game? Getting Javik a month or two months later does not imply that Javik was made after the fact.

I also liked how skyrim's dlc was handled after its release, as an example.

Yeah, I like how Bethesda blatantly lied or exaggerated about many features in the game as well; and how they dummed everything down, so in every dungeon within the game we could do the same animal stone, or animal claw puzzle. 

My favorite parts about Skyrim dlc were all the reused textures with new names, and the incclusion of stories that will be made irrelevant since your part in them will either be ignored or decided for you in the next game. 

I'm not suggesting Bioware has done right on their dlc either, but praising Bethesda given the massive flaws just because their dlc release time was later, just shows hows childish you are. 

There are two things wrong with your statement:

1) I wasn't talking about the quality of dlc...

2) Nowhere in my post did I praise Bethesda; I'd praised projekt red. Liking the implementation of Skyrim's dlc doesn't equal praising Bethesda.  

The only child here is you since you couldn't comprehend what I said plainly.  

What you said didn't suggest you weren't talking about quality. 

When you praise something I assume you admire the whole package, regardless of whether you don't specifically state what you do and don't like. 

But as I said in the latter of my post, praising a companies release time when they put out junk is childish.

If Bioware put out a great DLC early I bet you'd complain, where as if they released a crap dlc later you would love it.
Actually I bet you would whine either way, because you seem to have an angst problem given your prior posts. 

[Dean_the_Young]

Personally I don't mind Day 1 DLC, within limits. I approve of Bioware restoring content that would be left on the cutting room floor, and I both understand and accept promotional DLC rewards.

Of course, it can also be easily abused, and so I generally apply my totally subjective classy test- if the delivery has class, I'm ambivalent or approving.


My general standard is that, if you buy the game new, you should get the non-promotional Day 1 DLC. Character DLC in particular, like Zaeed and Shale. I can understand and accept the usage of a one-use code with each new game to discourage the use of the used game market, like the Zaeed DLC in ME2, but I'm less favorable towards additional purchases on Day 1 itself.

[leaguer of one]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Zoikster wrote...

I guess my question would be; if the game is already playable (start to finish by the staff) why would any content be cut? They have plenty of time to polish whatever content they have.

Well, the main story is complete. That likely doesn't include companion content, side quests, or variations in dialogue or different situations. The main quest line in DA2 was maybe two dozen questlines. In a game like Skyrim, it is even less. 

So unless a companion is totally integral to the plot (like Allistair or Anders), their content won't be totally complete. 


That being said, the fact that the *almost* complete content that didn't make the cut but could be finished between the time the game goes gold has, by no intentional planning, been a companion (when Bioware as a brand is well known for their companions) is, to my eyes, questionable. If DA:I has D1DLC, it will be a companion. And I'd say it's quite likely that they know exactly what companion they know right now they will say they cannot complete in time and sell as separate DLC. 

Is that wrong? Not inherently. But I think acting like there isn't some level of intentionality and planning in this is possibly a little misleading. Not to mention a Day One patch was needed much more for some of Bioware's games than having the teams work on DLC. Glotching animations and unplayable quests in DA2, not to mention the face import but for ME3, show that maybe the team's should be focused on the existing base game instead of looking at creating and releasing new content the very day of release. 

Just my own perceptions. 

Ok you have a point to say they should make sure the games don't have any horrible bugs in them...But that is a time resource issue, not a personel resource issue. Some bugs aren't really know till  after lauch were they are put through multiple system of different veraty.

Any, my point is the issue is not in the case of the focus of the programed but how they do qa for their games. Ether it's in house. through es, r third party. What ever it is it need to be fix. They have to find the problem  first by putting the game though multiple test though many different systems. A programer would have to be on stand by till the bugs are found to be fixed. That clearly does not have to be the entire team and they can easilly split for one  for fixing the game anddoing the dlc.

[MDCT506]

Zoikster wrote...

MDCT506 wrote...

Zoikster wrote...

I guess my question would be; if the game is already playable (start to finish by the staff) why would any content be cut? They have plenty of time to polish whatever content they have.

First off, what was actually said was...

1. The main storyline completely playable from beginning to end: This allows the story to be experienced in an interactive state, and lets us get pacing and spacing right.

Secondary content isn't mentioned as being complete or not and I imagine that this the area where things get cut from the game most often. 

No need to get snippy <_< I was only asking a question. Thanks for the perceptive response Jimmy 

Edit: I assumed the secondary components could be easily completed by fall of 2014 if they were able to get DA2 out so quickly, which is why I asked the question.

No offense was intended, sorry if you took it the wrong way, my bad.  Tone and intent are sometimes hard to convey and understand when all you have is text.  I like to give others the benefit of the doubt and I would appreciate it if people did the same for me. 

My point still stands though.  Even if the main story is playable from beginning to end, secondary content takes time.  I may be making an assumption of my own here, but I would think that they would be working on every piece of secondary content they possibly can before the content lock.  I imagne they work up to the final hours to get content in before the lock.  I can't imagine Bioware hires designers to sit on their duffs just because their to-do list for the day is done.  Keep the creative people creating new stuff till the lock is in. 

Moreover, Every piece of secondary content likely needs to be worked on by each department in the same way as the main story, models, textures, animations, voice overs, and a whole pile of other things.  The thing is, something isn't going to be ready.  Even if it is, it may need something else to work and that other thing isn't ready.  Also, sadly, even though the stuff may be done, it just might not fit properly into the rest of the game once all is said and done. 

As far as DA2 is concerned, the fact that it came out quickly is often linked with its precieved lack of content. 

[The Twilight God]

ARTHURIUSS wrote...

Not a single fan likes it and you get bad rep. Sure you make a few quick quid but all that negative rep will hurt you in the long run. Also at this juncture you don't have a lot of goodwill out there. Lots of people are expecting you to fail and will come at you with anything they can. Avoid giving them more ammunition.

Oh and I know you justify day 1 dlc by saying you begin work on it once the game's gone gold or w/e but maybe that extra manpower or time can be spent on polishing the existing game. 

I'm only writing this because I'm a fan who greatly cares about the well being of Bioware and the games it makes. Make DA:I the best game it can be and reclaim your reputation amongst the disgruntled audience.

Yours Sincerely
A very drunk & concerned fan

Bioware is incapable of being hurt in the short or long run. They can do whatever they want, when they want, how they want and EA get's all the blame. Besides, you saps are all to willing to part with your cash. I would be disappointed if they didn't have five Day1 DLCs at $20 each.  And these DLCs were planned as Day1 DLC before the game was out of the concept stage.

Deal with it.

[leaguer of one]

The Twilight God wrote...

ARTHURIUSS wrote...

Not a single fan likes it and you get bad rep. Sure you make a few quick quid but all that negative rep will hurt you in the long run. Also at this juncture you don't have a lot of goodwill out there. Lots of people are expecting you to fail and will come at you with anything they can. Avoid giving them more ammunition.

Oh and I know you justify day 1 dlc by saying you begin work on it once the game's gone gold or w/e but maybe that extra manpower or time can be spent on polishing the existing game. 

I'm only writing this because I'm a fan who greatly cares about the well being of Bioware and the games it makes. Make DA:I the best game it can be and reclaim your reputation amongst the disgruntled audience.

Yours Sincerely
A very drunk & concerned fan

Bioware is incapable of being hurt in the short or long run. They can do whatever they want, when they want, how they want and EA get's all the blame. Besides, you saps are all to willing to part with your cash. I would be disappointed if they didn't have five Day1 DLCs at $20 each.  And these DLCs were planned as Day1 DLC before the game was out of the concept stage.

Deal with it.

Right ... Bacause Zaeed and Shale cost us so muck...Oh wait, the was no cost for new purshages of the games. Yep, their is a way to do day one dlc with out nickeal and diming the customer... Who'd of thought?

The problem here is that their is a right way to do day one dlc and you won't acknpwlege it. Sure, there is bad ways to do it Like Javik with everyone paid extra for it to get it but the anwser to solving that is easy. Don't buy it. That's the only thing a person can do to stop badly done dlc.

And the fact remains this content would of never seen the light of day with out dlc any way. It's still an extra.

[Dutchess]

Skorm777 wrote...

renjility wrote...


Yeah, and the programmers don't work on D1DLC, certainly. Considering I've just encountered several nasty bugs upon replaying DAO, they could have spent their time differently. Same goes for ME3. Time to develop D1DLC, yet the face import bug took week to fix after release.

What bugs were those? I just finished my first mage warden two weeks ago and completed several other playthroughs long before then; and haven't encountered any bugs that were notable enough to remember. 

As with Skyrim, half the bugs people complain about are products of their own meddling, be it through mods or the toolset. 
 

So now most bugs are even the user's own fault? Of course. I'm sure my hair mods are to blame for everything. I encountered a lovely bug when fighting Gaxkang on nightmare three days ago. Somehow his drain ability permanently drains mana/stamina. After the fight my mage was left with not even half of her mana pool. Alistair's and Leliana's sustainables, which prior to the fight reserved about half of their stamina, suddenly claimed all stamina they had left. It took me some time to figure out what had caused this. Reloading, fast traveling and returning to camp did not fix it. I googled and found a few threads about it that were at least 4 years old, but clearly Bioware still has not fixed this. 

In Awakening my rogue permanently lost all her equipment during the Architect quest in which he tries to make a clone of you. Apparently she wore a piece of armor that required more strength points than she actually had, but was still able to wear thanks to a ring that gave + strength. Unfortunately the game can't understand this and failed to spawn the clone with my warden's equipment. Because I had just bought some of the best items, I was forced to reload a save that was hours old and had to do the all the forest quests again. 

There was also the rather annoying, although harmless, glitch with my shapeshifter. Often when she exited spider or bear form, she would remain in this form, only flipped upside down. This remained even when in conversations. Accessing the inventory usually seemed to remedy this. 

 You say "they have time to develop D1DLC" yet you have no insight into whether or not they draw from the vanilla team, or use manpower from other sources.

Does it really matter on what sources the development is based? The point is that the sources are there, and that they thus could have been used to improve the main game. When a game like DA2 has a game-breaking bug like the Isabela/Sebastian friendship bug which can slow your Hawke to a crawl upon release, then clearly those resources were necessary for the game itself.

[leaguer of one]

renjility wrote...



Does it really matter on what sources the development is based? The point is that the sources are there, and that they thus could have been used to improve the main game. When a game like DA2 has a game-breaking bug like the Isabela/Sebastian friendship bug which can slow your Hawke to a crawl upon release, then clearly those resources were necessary for the game itself.

You do know that aspect of building  and the aspect of bug finding are done in 2 different ways by 2 different department. The bug finding is part of the qa team and game tester team. You are don't need all nor most of the programers to fix the bugs they find. It's purely a time mange resource that a numbers one. This is a  qa issue. Programmer make dlc don't take way from that. It just mean they need more time testing their game.

[Chaos Hammer]

DLC is Bull****, it never feels like it flows with the rest of the game, it feels extra. Not to mention in a game I payed 60 dollars to get, I remember when games were expensive at 40 but I digress, I shouldn't hav e to shell out another 30 bucks just to have the full experience.

But I can live with those ... I guess, but day one dlc? personally I think it should be free/included like shale was.

[Maverick827]

Chaos Hammer wrote...

I remember when games were expensive at 40

When was this?

personally I think it should be free/included like shale was.

Why?

[leaguer of one]

Chaos Hammer wrote...

DLC is Bull****, it never feels like it flows with the rest of the game, it feels extra. Not to mention in a game I payed 60 dollars to get, I remember when games were expensive at 40 but I digress, I shouldn't hav e to shell out another 30 bucks just to have the full experience.

But I can live with those ... I guess, but day one dlc? personally I think it should be free/included like shale was.

1. The dlc is not part of the full experiance.
2. BW dlc is no where near $30.
4. If you are saying  that is how much it cost all together, remember that that the lenght and contect all the dlc are all together equal to that as an expantion. An expantion nomally cost $30-$40.

[leaguer of one]

Maverick827 wrote...

Chaos Hammer wrote...

personally I think it should be free/included like shale was.

Why?

You want to pay for day one dlc?

Modifié par leaguer of one, 23 décembre 2013 - 04:12 .

[Quyk Sylvyr]

You know, the "Day 1 DLC" in DA2 was actually part of a pre-order bonus. I guess I don't see anything wrong with offering a pre-order bonus as a reward for those that are willing to pay full price before the game even comes out, and then offering an alternative method for those that didn't pre-order.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I love DLC. It's a glorious step toward modular game development, where we only buy the features we want.