70 réponses à ce sujet

[Devtek]

Exclusive means everything. Dragonborn came out ~ 1-1.5 years post Skyrim was still Xbox exclusive.

 

Skyrim and Bioware games are different in the kind of experience expected.  Story was not a main part of Skyrim, it is for Dragon Age.  The quote was "premier content" that could be anything it didn't say "all" content first.  FTP games call new skins "premier content".  I'm just hoping that in this case it doesn't mean "all additional content", because that would be a crap move.  I'm honestly surprised EA doesn't have exclusive timed content for their platform (Origin).

[AkiKishi]

cd red shows how it is done

 

I do wonder if they will hold onto their principles as they get larger and if Witcher3 is anything to go by, they will. I really hope they do. 

 

Should add Cyberpunk, although that's ready when it's done.

[omnitremere]

All companies are doing this.  It's not limited to EA and therefore I find it hard to criticize them for it.  This seems more like an overall industry problem.  

[GreyWardenNathan]

You realize that pretty much every company does this right? Sony did the same thing with watch dogs and every assassin's creed since 2.

I stated later that i don't believe in it full stop, even if it benefits me. As far as i can remember though it was first Microsoft who introduced it. I just believe everyone should be able to have access to the same dlc, when they have already bought the initial game. Especially when some people who love the franchise are even paying in excess of £100, to get the Inquisitors edition.

[Captain Nimbaud]

This is nothing new, as has been pointed out Destiny has timed dlc for PS4, as I'm sure did Watch Dogs and others. Even as an Xboner I know the dlc will be nothing major, these timed exclusive dlcs usually only last an hour at most. As long as they don't take away from the depth of the core experience I'm guessing they'll be window dressing. The fact is Microsoft has bags o' cash and they're going to use it, silly business practice but both will do it to defy parity and offer "incentive". All I know is the game looks stunning and I can't wait to play regardless of platform.

[LilyasAvalon]

You realize that pretty much every company does this right? Sony did the same thing with watch dogs and every assassin's creed since 2.

 

And it still isn't fair even then.

 

I'm a HUGE Assassin's Creed fan but I'm a PC gamer and I've NEVER approved of what Ubisoft has done with exclusive content.

[TK514]

I'm playing it on a PS4, and I don't see a problem.  Maybe because I expected it all along.

 

Microsoft, BioWare, and EA don't hate you.  They aren't trying to punish you.  They're trying to make money, and so far this has proven to be a method that nets them positive value.  Simple as that.

[Lenimph]

If it's a story DLC I am going to be extremely discontent.  

 

You know how they say... if you dont like it don't buy it... how can I approach the situation when you can't buy something you like? I'm certainly not going to buy a Xbox One. I don't get how this exclusive content stuff actually works to encourage sales. Well Tomb Raider Underworld dlc did convice me to get a 360 over a PS3 back in the day but the 360 was also a lot cheaper and a decent console. But now days I have absolutely no interest in buying a console that will perform worse then my 3 year old pc so no exclusive content is going to persuade me,  even if it was literally a sex with Leliana mini game I would not buy a xbox one, after their whole approach to selling it to us last year and how Sony ripped them a new one. 

 

Uhg so angry 

[Zjarcal]

All I really wanna know is how long it'll take for the DLC to hit other platforms and whether or not it'll be story based content.

 

If we're talking about a week or so, fine, it still stinks but I won't get too pissy about it. If we're talking months though... HEADS WILL ROLL

 

And no I am most definitely not buying a crap console just for this, **** that.

[Ghostjs]

All I really wanna know is how long it'll take for the DLC to hit other platforms and whether or not it'll be story based content.

 

If we're talking about a week or so, fine, it still stinks but I won't get too pissy about it. If we're talking months though... HEADS WILL ROLL

 

And no I am most definitely not buying a crap console just for this, **** that.

Aren't most exclusive contracts set to 30 days or more?

[Zjarcal]

Aren't most exclusive contracts set to 30 days or more?

 

Hell if I know, but we've already seen plenty of timed exclusive things take months before they show up elsewhere.

[HydroFlame20]

I'm not surprised at all it was something I already knew deep down but oh well whats done is done.

[The Prime Magus]

Why do people feel the need to defend questionable business practices that harm customers just because they net the publisher more profit?  I mean, yes, it's for the money...how does that make it okay and means they shouldn't get backlash for it?

 

At the moment we don't know if or how shafted were getting right now, and that's really a fault on EA right now.  Between their Xbox and EA press conference, they should have given us some detail on just what this premium content exclusive is.  They're on thin ice already with DLCs alone, not to mention winning back people DA2 lost, they really should be trading more carefully than this.  They really should have told us what this exclusivity was if they were going to bother mentioning it at all.  

[Oswin]

I really hope it's just armour or something, or that it won't be a really long exclusive. 

Skyrim was only a long one because it simply wouldn't work on PS3. Even when they finally did realise it, it was so very broken.

 

I didn't think EA and Microsoft were friends right now. They certainly weren't last year when they gave Sony all their exclusives. 

[AkiKishi]

I'll go with 30 days. No way does EA want to lose out on PS4 owners going elsewhere because of this. They already lost a packet of TitanFall.

[TK514]

Why do people feel the need to defend questionable business practices that harm customers just because they net the publisher more profit?  I mean, yes, it's for the money...how does that make it okay and means they shouldn't get backlash for it?

 

I laughed.  Do tell what harm you are suffering. 

 

You have to wait patiently while someone else gets served first?  The horror.

[wrigleyviller]

Let's all just stipulate a few things:

 

1. Of course this is being done to make money.

2. Yes, many other companies and games do the same thing.

3. We don't know yet what this content actually is, so let's remain at least moderately calm about this for the time being. We could be talking about a set of armor, or something similarly mundane.

4. Even if this content is desirable, we acknowledge that this decision was probably made very high up the food chain. Possibly BioWare had no input, and EA made this decision alone. In any case, 95% of the BioWare staff had nothing to do with this and please keep interacting with us and don't get turned off by endless negativity on the boards.

 

That being said:

 

1. If this content is anything more interesting than a DLC-armor set or something, this is total [censored]. Dividing exclusives between sellers (or delaying content for some platforms) is among the worst, most anti-fan friendly practices, whether we're talking tracks on albums or DLC. I hate it, you hate, everyone hates it. I paid $70 dollars, 8 months in advance for your product, and I shouldn't receive an inferior version that I was never told was going to be inferior just because I happen to play on a PC instead of an Xbox One. Don't do this.

2. Some people paid $170(!), 8 months in advance for a collector's edition that will be missing content. Don't do this.

3. Just because other companies do this too doesn't make it OK. That should be pretty obvious.

[Ibn_Shisha]

Let's all just stipulate a few things:

 

1. Of course this is being done to make money.

2. Yes, many other companies and games do the same thing.

3. We don't know yet what this content actually is, so let's remain at least moderately calm about this form the time being. We could be talking about a set of armor, or something similarly mundane.

4. Even if this content is desirable, we acknowledge that this decision was probably made very high up the food chain. Possibly BioWare had no input, and EA made this decision alone. In any case, 95% of the BioWare staff had nothing to do with this and please keep interacting with us and don't get turned off by endless negativity on the boards.

 

That being said:

 

1. If this content is anything more interesting than a DLC-armor set or something, this is total [censored]. Dividing exclusives between sellers (or delaying content for some platforms) is among the worst, most anti-fan friendly practices, whether we're talking tracks on albums or DLC. I hate it, you hate, everyone hates it. I paid $70 dollars, 8 months in advance for your product, and I shouldn't receive an inferior version that I was never told was going to be inferior just because I happen to play on a PC instead of an Xbox One. Don't do this.

2. Some people paid $170(!), 8 months in advance for a collector's edition that will be missing content. Don't do this.

3. Just because other companies do this too doesn't make it OK. That should be pretty obvious.

[The Prime Magus]

The point of a business is to make money. We don't have to like it. If the practice stops making them money they will adjust accordingly. It's the way of the world no matter the industry.

 

I mean, duh.  That's not a reason for people to shut up about what they don't like.  In fact, it's the opposite; so every time someone points out a bad practice, responding with "they're doing it to make money" doesn't really add or do anything.  It's pretty much irrelevant.  

[Motoko k]

When you have editions of your game selling for £140 I don't think not making money is really a issue, EA isn't some indie start up company.

[ManOfSteel]

Yeah, but doesn't Microsoft's exclusive include Windows PC and Xbox systems?

It does not.

[phantomrachie]

I don't think it will be story DLC. I get the feeling that will be armour or weapons or somthing.

 

While timed exclusives are annoying at least non XboxOne owners will get the content after 30 days. It would be MUCH worse if it never came to other platforms 

[KennethAFTopp]

Perhaps a mount exclusive as well, I dunno man, hopefully it is not Story DLC, that would be the dumbest idea ever since Dragon Age 2's version of Anders.

[The Prime Magus]

I laughed.  Do tell what harm you are suffering. 

 

You have to wait patiently while someone else gets served first?  The horror.

 

I think it's pretty obvious I'm not talking about some sort of end of the world sleight, and am being very level about this.  I made it pretty clear we don't know what it is yet, how bad or even if it's bad at all, and it was bad practice to announce this without any detail.  But it's simplistic to not see why people should be worried.  They paid for a complete game, and in a worst case scenario they're not getting it until potentially a month or more after they have the rest of the game, and we don't even know the impact of that.  

 

That's worst case scenario.  The problem being at the moment, we don't really have a reason to believe either way, which is just the fault of a bad press conference. it could be nothing.  But please, I'm not calling for heads or panic,and am just making very reasonable statements about what I think is also reasonable discontent, so if you want to say something to me, lose the attitude.  I don't want to treat you like an illogical jerk either, it belittles us both and just isn't pleasant.  Don't be that guy.