38 réponses à ce sujet

[SofaJockey]

I think it's less about Sony and the 360, and more about punishing those who didn't upgrade to the X1.  Financially, this won't touch Sony.  Others have suggested that MS probably compensated Bioware for the sales loss for the other consoles.  That leaves only ONE bit left in the tale:  consumers.  We basically get the finger for not ditching our current systems (or rival systems), and jumping to the newest Microsoft product.  Not to mention the fact that no one from Bioware seems to be able to actually SAY PS4/PS3/XBox 360.  They avoid even USING those names.  At what point in time did we actually get to the point where we could legally ban someone from using someone ELSES name?  Or even referencing them in some way?  

 

Now, will I buy this DLC?  ASSUMING that it will ever come to a console/system that I have?  Sure, I probably will.  I love the series.  I REALLY, REALLY do.  However, I used to say that about Final Fantasy...all the way up to XIII.  I refuse to touch the series now.  Now it's a bunch of shonen fanfic writers who are obsessed with pretty boy gangsters.  Square used to be the top dog...now they are struggling.  THEY made a deal with MS as well...which will probably kill off the Tomb Raider series for good.  

 

You know what they say...when you sup with the devil, use a long spoon.

 

A few thoughts,

 

• Microsoft did not just 'probably' compensate EA for lost sales else why would they do it? The logic is clear, unpopular with fans certainly, but the argument: Here is some cash to let [this group of gamers] have access first, means no gambling for EA for part of their budget, it's money in the bank.
• The only hold Microsoft have for their marketing, mostly to encourage upgrades from PS3/Xbox 360 (rather than cross-console swaps over a DLC) is to not say how long the exclusivity is (whether it be 1 month or 3 months). That's why Apple don't say new stuff is coming out until launch day to not kill sales of current stock stone dead.
• Any deal would have big financial claw backs from EA if someone 'leaks' the exclusivity period because it would undermine the point of the deal. You know what forums are like, the slightest ambiguous wording from a BioWare/EA employee would be seized upon in a moment. The length of embargo may not even have been shared with most BioWare employees simply to protect them.
• And as for Tomb Raider, the reboot struggled to meet the financial expectations sunk into it, despite its fan success (mostly). It is likely that the exclusivity deal (and Microsoft have not bought the franchise, it is timed) was the only way to make a further sequel financially secure. You don't upset that many people unless you have to. If the game is decent it will secure the franchise's future despite a block of fanatical fans boycotting it, as most games are bought casually in supermarkets.

I acknowledge your sentiments and expect these deals to reduce as new gen console adoption becomes more saturated.

[Darkstarr11]

A few thoughts,

 

• Microsoft did not just 'probably' compensate EA for lost sales else why would they do it? The logic is clear, unpopular with fans certainly, but the argument: Here is some cash to let [this group of gamers] have access first, means no gambling for EA for part of their budget, it's money in the bank.
• The only hold Microsoft have for their marketing, mostly to encourage upgrades from PS3/Xbox 360 (rather than cross-console swaps over a DLC) is to not say how long the exclusivity is (whether it be 1 month or 3 months). That's why Apple don't say new stuff is coming out until launch day to not kill sales of current stock stone dead.
• Any deal would have big financial claw backs from EA if someone 'leaks' the exclusivity period because it would undermine the point of the deal. You know what forums are like, the slightest ambiguous wording from a BioWare/EA employee would be seized upon in a moment. The length of embargo may not even have been shared with most BioWare employees simply to protect them.
• And as for Tomb Raider, the reboot struggled to meet the financial expectations sunk into it, despite its fan success (mostly). It is likely that the exclusivity deal (and Microsoft have not bought the franchise, it is timed) was the only way to make a further sequel financially secure. You don't upset that many people unless you have to. If the game is decent it will secure the franchise's future despite a block of fanatical fans boycotting it, as most games are bought casually in supermarkets.

I acknowledge your sentiments and expect these deals to reduce as new gen console adoption becomes more saturated.

 

Good points.  I agree.  And yes, I hope that they reduce the deals as well...but from a business standpoint, yes, I can understand them.  I appreciate your thoughts.  Well put.

[exboomer]

or I won't buy it. I have been playing this game since the launch day and I always planned to finish it right before Witcher 3. I will need at least a couple of weeks before that game comes out to play this dlc so Jaws of Hakkon better come out in a month on PS4. I hate this exclusivity bullsh*t. The game sold most copies on PS4 and it is really stupid to punish the majority of your costumers. You have one month Bioware...one month.

I agree. More people own PS4's then Xbox1's and now that the price has gone back up to $449 they aren't going to be selling a lot more of them IMO. And DA:I was game tested on the PS4 before it was released which should tell you that MS knew this and yet they continue with their anti-comsumer exclusivity crap. 

[SofaJockey]

I agree. More people own PS4's then Xbox1's and now that the price has gone back up to $449 they aren't going to be selling a lot more of them IMO. And DA:I was game tested on the PS4 before it was released which should tell you that MS knew this and yet they continue with their anti-comsumer exclusivity crap. 

 

You may not like it, but this is all about the numbers.

It's platform competition, which drives a market, encourages technical development, often limits prices and so is mostly pro-consumer (in the long run).

 

Highly invested individuals are almost just as likely to buy it when the exclusivity ends,

so for EA who has been paid a bunch of cash no doubt (for something that is done on both console platforms) there is very little downside.

 

BioWare will have a (partially) grumpy forum for a time, 

but let's face it, whatever BioWare do, the forum is grumbling about something most of the time anyway.

[ThirteenthJester13]

WTF. Bioware just urks me so friggin bad. No release on PS4 and I just bought BloodyShite ahem I mean BloodBORE and im thinking ill trade it in and rebuy my Dark Souls 2 game one PS4 to keep me busy with some more action oriented RPG cuz BloodBORE sucks. Awkward Graphics. Something isn't right with it. No parry its just not my cup of Tea an I don't ee how it could be any souls fans cup of tea.

 

On the other Hand Inquisition still has atleast one more playthru for me... unless I get so bored of it. I shoudnt of been watching all the latest witcher videos of late cuz now im spoiled by its Superiority despite lack of custom character the game is just looking awesome. it better be. Idk if the gaming industry can handle more 2014s. I cant. Its like I haven't been laid by my Game console since 2008 or something,

[melbye90]

I was finally going to buy the game and then i find out that EA and Bioware sold out to Microsoft. Not buying now cause it is obvious that my Playstation-money isn't important enough

[LinksOcarina]

It is not going to stop any time soon though regarding EA products at least, and there is a simple reason why. 

 

EA Access.

 

It may have little to do with the DLC itself, but it has more to do with the mentality a lot of publishers are using to make money. Exclusivity to a console has become the new trend to replace "Original I.P". Remember the days when you can tell a game was from one console or another? When Halo was Microsoft only while Sony had Uncharted?

 

Those days have been numbered for a while now. The most popular and prolific releases, games like Dragon Age, Assassins Creed, Call of Duty, even GTA, are no long console exclusive. So how do you continue to grow your homegrown I.P's while giving publishers incentive to jump in on the action?

 

EA Access serves that purpose, plus more. For EA, it brings them a step closer to the service model they have been gunning for, this time through a service that is pretty much similar to Netflix. The crop of games for use, early access to games, tech demos for games, the works. 

 

Also got to remember, Sony passed on the service,which is somewhat ironic because they claim that it "wasn't good value". The reason being, at the time Sony said that, they were about to launch their own, similar service, Playstation Now, which has it's own problems regarding price schemes. I did a whole analysis for EA Access, and it is honestly very cost effective if you are a fan of all types of EA products. Sport junkies would love it for sure. So the charges are suspect by Sony, and like self-serving because they don't want competition on their console. 

 

But welcome to the next step of the service model. Much like Netlix, Hulu, HBO, WWE Network, all of these application models are slowly replacing live television and streaming. All of it will soon be paywall apps instead of paying for cable every month at $100 a pop, you get to pick and choose which channels you want for half of the cost of that. 

 

For video games, this means access to games and downloadables for a fee. It probably won't kill the physical or downloadable market, but it will be the next alternative. And each company is going to do it. Nintendo has the Nintendo Network and the Virtual Console, Sony has Playstation Now in conjunction with PSN, Microsoft has Xbox Live and is letting others join in with apps, like EA Access.

 

And the whole point of this in the end is why we have exclusivity deals. We knew this was coming for Dragon Age because they announced it back when EA Access launched. It will not be the only game with an exclusivity deal though, and you need to keep in mind the likes of Tomb Raider, or Skyrim, having the same thing done to them as well. Both platforms are guilty of it, but both platforms are also making money at the same time, so whether it's a bad practice or not, it's not going anywhere.

[LostInReverie19]

I play on PC, but even I think it's BS that the new DLC is only for PC and Xbox1 right now. What the hell was Bioware thinking? If I were you, I would just not buy it. Bioware and EA (mostly EA because I'm sure it's their fault) need to learn that they can't keep pulling this crap, that players will not put up with it.

[Suledin]

I play on PC, but even I think it's BS that the new DLC is only for PC and Xbox1 right now. What the hell was Bioware thinking? If I were you, I would just not buy it. Bioware and EA (mostly EA because I'm sure it's their fault) need to learn that they can't keep pulling this crap, that players will not put up with it.

Honestly there was a moment that I told myself 'I won't buy this DLC to show my anger', but it won't help anyway. I still want more out of this game. More stories, more places to explore 'cause this game is beautiful. I hope they realize how many people are upset. Perhaps they won't do it again in the future. But if they do, it means that they value 'quick money' above Dragon Age fans. 
 

[Jaron Oberyn]

Oh I'm sure Bioware is quaking in their little boots at that statement. Thanks for the laugh OP. I'll see you in a couple of months when you post your review of the dlc.

[SofaJockey]

Aaryn Flynn's recent response makes me think they are very aware of the situation.

 

Think of it like this, the DLC timed exclusive deal was likely done a year ago, maybe even longer.

The world looks very different when your last two games were DA2 and ME3, both with 'issues'...

 

If you get an offer for some low-risk cash to help you promote your game, when the 'gaming jury is still out' I could see that would be very tempting.

 

With 134 GOTY's comes both success and some financial confidence, but the deal was still done, so they will need to honour that,

but they can also afford to give much clearer assurances about the future because with a successful game your dependence on financial partnerships reduces.

 

It will be interesting to see what emerges this week.

[shortbreadspacer]

Sometimes I forget about how many games used to be console exclusive. Unfortunately these DLC deals are the new version of that. At least we overall have more choices these days. I'm a PS4 user and I too am frustrated, but my main source of anger is not knowing the date.

[shortbreadspacer]

Looks like it's May... sigh.

[Darkstarr11]

Aaryn Flynn's recent response makes me think they are very aware of the situation.

 

Think of it like this, the DLC timed exclusive deal was likely done a year ago, maybe even longer.

The world looks very different when your last two games were DA2 and ME3, both with 'issues'...

 

If you get an offer for some low-risk cash to help you promote your game, when the 'gaming jury is still out' I could see that would be very tempting.

 

With 134 GOTY's comes both success and some financial confidence, but the deal was still done, so they will need to honour that,

but they can also afford to give much clearer assurances about the future because with a successful game your dependence on financial partnerships reduces.

 

It will be interesting to see what emerges this week.

 

Yeah, true.  It's hard to remember that sitting on this end of it.  I'm pretty sure that's what happened with Tomb Raider.  Future looks iffy...then, a guy walks up with a lotta cash offering to help you and yours get by?  Hard to say no.  Like you said, DAII and ME3 had some issues that made waves.  With ME3, it rocked the boat.  There was probably a bit of talk about how to move forward on DAI.  

 

Plus...now that I think about it, when you look around your office (or if you own a business this should be easy) and look at the faces of the others who work there, think hard.  If your game (or product, or service) isn't up to snuff, some of those people might be out the door, through little fault of their own.  Low man on the totem pole often gets booted first.  I doubt Bioware wants to kick people out the door that worked hard on their game.  You know, 'Hey, great job.  Beautiful work.  Hinterlands is so addicting, people haven't even finished their first story quests!  Um, yeah...well...here's the thing...you do great work.  Great work...I'm sure you'd be an asset at any company in the field.  You ever thought about...branching out?  Seeing life...differently, at a different office?  Let me ask you...where do you see yourself in five years?'

 

I'm hesitant to get this DLC now...immediately at least, but yeah, I get why they'd take the money upfront.  Still, May...summer, dating...and Mothers Day.  Late May?  Saving for the wife's birthday.  Sadly, she's not a fan of Dragon Age...she's more of a 'I need a new Dell' kinda gal...