812 réponses à ce sujet

[Sartoz]

 Just keep doing what you are doing with your normal high quality.  

Are we talking about game crashing quality here?

[Apollexander]

Bioware released the storage chest and the armor tint and they will release the black market. But they are stupid because these add-ons are in patches, not DLC. So players bash Bioware for launching an unpolished game. On the other hand, CDP already announced they will release 16 DLCs which are just like hairstyles and so on. And players praise them because those are 'free DLCs', not 'patches'! How clever CDP is!

And Bioware is also bashed for releasing a $15-DLC. Again, CDP is so clever and they said they will release an 'expansion pass'. It is not DLC, not 'season pass', but 'expansion'! Well,there will be 'Season One' and 'Season Two', but that's EXPANSION, just like the good old golden days! How clever!

[Mihura]

2) Your arguments regarding Darrah lying have no bearing on the subject at hand, and defame Darrah based upon what is said at pre-release stages vs. Post-release stages of a game. Not to mention You are overlooking the fact that since Heart of Stone and Blood and Wine were announced before Witcher 3 was even released, they even said "NO" to the concept of a season pass back in November. Regardless of content size, it's a season pass, a competitive price designed for two pieces of content that one can argue are being made concurrently with the development of the Witcher 3 (god forbid someone accuses them of cutting content out of their game...that would be a bad thing to do right? Sarcasm aside this has always been a silly argument, it's why I am not making it though.)

 

Holyshit that article is hilarious, I totally forgot about that. Man, got to love a good PR white lie now and then.

[Mirrman70]

I disliked Awakening.  Not because it was full of glitches or because the characters were bland (I'll be honest Anders felt like "Alistair the Mage").  I disliked it because it seemed overall redundant. There is one choice in the entire expansion that I feel could have a major a effect later on and that is the fate of the Architect (he might not even be dead if you "killed" him).

 

Jaws of Hakkon was worth purchasing for me (thus subjectively) because it expanded on the Avvar. the first Inquisition and it gave some much needed actual Heavy Armor for my Qunari warrior. In fact the only DLC to date that I really felt stupid for purchasing was Amgarrak.

[X Equestris]

There is nothing illogical about any of my posts. You are merely getting upset and resulting to insults as a means of showing your frustration for my lack of agreement.
 
Quality is subjective. What you failed to understand through my post is that someone's opinion, plus good sales and high reviews, show a positive correlation that would lead one to believe that many see the product as good. On the contrary, your sole opinion with nothing to correlate with it is much weaker in comparison. Thus, while an opinion of a product is still purely subjective, the more positive outlook by the majority is likely to outshine the more negative outlook by the minority. That should be rather simple for you to understand. It's a basic concept.
 
You are resulting to the ever over-used Straw Man for a lack of rebuttals and a yearning to win a "competition" that never existed. If you can not understand the basic meaning of the English language, then you are beyond help. Your opinion really doesn't matter when Awakening did well and Mass Effect 3 did well, regardless of how you feel about either of them.

So you accuse someone of throwing about insults, and then stoop to insults of your own. I guess you missed the hypocrisy.

[o Ventus]

There is nothing illogical about any of my posts. You are merely getting upset and resulting to insults as a means of showing your frustration for my lack of agreement.

 

No, I'm genuinely curious as to how you can say that my opinion doesn't matter, but then point to reviews (which are opinions themselves) and use those to objectively claim that something is good. How you don't see the irony and hypocrisy in that is astounding.

 

 

 

 

Quality is subjective. What you failed to understand through my post is that someone's opinion, plus good sales and high reviews, show a positive correlation that would lead one to believe that many see the product as good. On the contrary, your sole opinion with nothing to correlate with it is much weaker in comparison. Thus, while an opinion of a product is still purely subjective, the more positive outlook by the majority is likely to outshine the more negative outlook by the minority. That should be rather simple for you to understand. It's a basic concept.

 

No, it's really, REALLY not. DA2 scored high marks from critics when it came out too, and that game is near-universally hated by non-critics. Take a look around here, or on GiantBomb, or GameFaqs, or any other video game site.

 

 

 

You are resulting to the ever over-used Straw Man for a lack of rebuttals and a yearning to win a "competition" that never existed. If you can not understand the basic meaning of the English language, then you are beyond help. Your opinion really doesn't matter when Awakening did well and Mass Effect 3 did well, regardless of how you feel about either of them.

 

I haven't actually put up any straw men, but then that seems to be coming back as a buzzword, so I can't really fault you for that. 

 

 

Seriously, does nobody else notice the total ass-backwardness of the OP? Going by his logic, Jaws of Hakkon must be pretty good, right? It's got high marks and a good MetaScore, yet he and plenty of other people just say that it's "an empty zone" with "no story".

[Cyberstrike nTo]

Agreed, though I also think that CDPR has gained a pretty fanatic fanbase that would be blind to any faults the game might have and would still worship it no matter what. See now with the expansions.

Before, everyone was whining about being able to buy expansion passes and pre-ordering stuff when you didn't know if the game and DLC were worth it, and how that was the developers trying to make gamers give them more money.

People also go crazy mad when devs talk about DLC before the full game is even out.

CDPR announced two DLC, and an expansion pass before the game has been released. There are zero complaints and everyone who points out how this is basically the same is shut down. That comes from someone that really likes the Witcher series. I'm not saying they shouldn't do this, but I just find it extremely interesting how everyone is jumping to CDPR's defense when they are technically doing exactly the same as other devs. If you also want to talk about TW3's free dlc (which will be outfits), then you could argue that, hey, DAI (and ME3) do that as well with the free MP dlc. Because they used the word 'expansion', it's suddenly different, while Jaws of Hakkon also literally provides an expansion of the game (a large map with hours worth of content). But it doesn't count because they called it DLC instead of the magic word ~expansion~?

And the most important thing to remember is that whatever selling practices you disagree with, it's EA you should be mad at, not Bioware. Bioware is the dev team. EA is in charge of how much they'll sell it, and what they want the devs to make and DLC plans. CDPR doesn't have an 'overlord' as far as I know?

 

All fair points and a question: "What is the difference between an expansion pack and a DLC?" Is it file size, price, amount of content, or something else?

[Al Foley]

Are we talking about game crashing quality here?

Amusing.  

 

Meh, I suppose that post does deserve some clarification.  It seems Jaws of Hakkon, while good, is not their usual high quality when it comes to DLC.  So, their usual High Quality look to Citadel, LOTSB, Overlord, Mark of the Assassin, Awakening, and Legacy.  

[LinksOcarina]

Holyshit that article is hilarious, I totally forgot about that. Man, got to love a good PR white lie now and then.

 

I aim to please.

 

 

 

Seriously, does nobody else notice the total ass-backwardness of the OP? Going by his logic, Jaws of Hakkon must be pretty good, right? It's got high marks and a good MetaScore, yet he and plenty of other people just say that it's "an empty zone" with "no story".

 

I did warn people. I guess no one saw that.

 

[Heimdall]

Seriously, does nobody else notice the total ass-backwardness of the OP? Going by his logic, Jaws of Hakkon must be pretty good, right? It's got high marks and a good MetaScore, yet he and plenty of other people just say that it's "an empty zone" with "no story".

And the OP still can't give a meaningful reason why Skyrim's Dragonborn is an expansion by his definition, but JoH is but a lowly DLC pack.

[o Ventus]

And the OP still can't give a meaningful reason why Skyrim's Dragonborn is an expansion by his definition, but JoH is but a lowly DLC pack.

I'm still trying to figure out the difference between "expansion" and "DLC". What makes an expansion an expansion, and not just DLC? They're both downloadable content that expands on the core game. They are literally the same.

 

Take Awakening for DAO and Tiny Tina's Assault on Dragon Keep for Borderlands 2. Both add new zones (with main quests and side quests)), new monsters and enemies, new weapons, and new characters. So why is Awakening an "expansion" while Dragon Keep (which I think is inifinitely more fun than Awakening) is just a DLC pack?

 

But for some reason, when people hear "expansion", they think it's something developed entirely after the core game was done and shipped made by the devs out of the kindness of their hearts, while DLC is assumed to be things ripped from the disc and later sold standalone because the devs are greedy and lazy.

[wolfhowwl]

Awakening was a huge financial success? Where do you get this from? Do you have sales numbers, verified revenue and production cost listings? No? Then all you can do is trust official statements that never indicated aforementionend success.

 

Awakening was universally loved? I know a lot of players who would disagree.

 

While expansion packs are seen in a better light than DLC by a good amount of players, they are a dying off format. Too much development time, too many resources and nowhere near the revenue that DLCs provide. Video game production is business in the first line, although some may don't want to accept this.

 

Nowhere. Revan posted some mediocre reviews and imaginary VGChartz sales numbers and acted like that somehow made the expansion being successful a fact. Clearly we should conclude that Darrah is lying and that anyone who disagrees is a BioWare fanboy based on this overwhelming evidence.

[Heimdall]

I'm still trying to figure out the difference between "expansion" and "DLC". What makes an expansion an expansion, and not just DLC? They're both downloadable content that expands on the core game. They are literally the same.

 

Take Awakening for DAO and Tiny Tina's Assault on Dragon Keep for Borderlands 2. Both add new zones, new monsters and enemies, new weapons, and new characters. So why is Awakening an "expansion" while Dragon Keep (which I think is inifinitely more fun than Awakening) is just a DLC pack?

It's completely arbitrary as far as I can tell.  Its an outdated term.

 

I've tried getting the OP to elaborate, but I keep being told to go play old expansions because he can't.

[AlanC9]

No, it's really, REALLY not. DA2 scored high marks from critics when it came out too, and that game is near-universally hated by non-critics. Take a look around here, or on GiantBomb, or GameFaqs, or any other video game site.

I have seen an easing in the outright DA2 hate lately, though. A fair number of us are moving from "hate" to "meh."

[AlanC9]

It's completely arbitrary as far as I can tell.  Its an outdated term.
 
I've tried getting the OP to elaborate, but I keep being told to go play old expansions because he can't.

You could probably get somewhere with a dollar/gameplay hour ratio. Hard to tell, though, because sometimes the case is about the poor value of current DLCs relative to something like DAA, and sometimes the case is about larger blocks of content being more memorable, or some such.

[wolfhowwl]

I have seen an easing in the outright DA2 hate lately, though. A fair number of us are moving from "hate" to "meh."

 

It has been four years, perhaps people have finally recovered from BioWare betraying them, and moved on with their lives? Now if only some would do the same for ME3...

[KaiserShep]

I disliked Awakening.  Not because it was full of glitches or because the characters were bland (I'll be honest Anders felt like "Alistair the Mage").  I disliked it because it seemed overall redundant. There is one choice in the entire expansion that I feel could have a major a effect later on and that is the fate of the Architect (he might not even be dead if you "killed" him).
 
Jaws of Hakkon was worth purchasing for me (thus subjectively) because it expanded on the Avvar. the first Inquisition and it gave some much needed actual Heavy Armor for my Qunari warrior. In fact the only DLC to date that I really felt stupid for purchasing was Amgarrak.

I'm pretty glad that Awakening, Golems and Witch Hunt were free with my $15 copy of DA:O. I would've regretted paying separately for all those.

[Phoe77]

I have seen an easing in the outright DA2 hate lately, though. A fair number of us are moving from "hate" to "meh."

 

I think a lot of that is because the wound isn't as fresh, so to speak.

 

I also pretty much only play Awakening as a formality now.  The first playthrough was fine, but there's nothing in the Expansion that's good enough to make me want to go through it again.  I think the base game did everything better and the story isn't enough to convince me to do multiple playthroughs.  Interestingly enough, I probably wouldn't have that same issue if everything were the same except for the length of the new content.  After all, there's nothing really fantastic about Warden's Keep in my mind, but I've played through that countless times because I don't have to devote such a great deal of time to it.  

[Wulfram]

I think Awakening highlights one difficulty of expansions, which is that the gameplay often struggles at very high levels. And even the story can struggle to find a sensible place to go.

Though I feel the main problem with DA:A is that it lacks returning characters, other than Oghren and cameos. In practice I feel our Player Characters are very much defined by their relationships to the companions, so without that context the continuation of the story can feel a bit hollow.

[Silfren]

I'm also not aware of DA:UE selling many copies at full price. Got any sales figures to back this up with? And was Awakening really the selling point of the UE? I was just as interested in the DLCs, myself -- but then again, I wasn't interested enough to buy DA:UE until it discounted to 20 USD. I'd be just as interested in ME2 or ME3 UEs.

 

This.  I don't know that many people were buying the Ultimate Edition at full price because the game had been out for quite a while by that point.  I didn't even come across the Ultimate Edition until it was $20 - and that's precisely why I bought it, because it had all the DLCs and the expansion bundled with the base game, for a steeply discounted price.

[KaiserShep]

I think Awakening highlights one difficulty of expansions, which is that the gameplay often struggles at very high levels. And even the story can struggle to find a sensible place to go.Though I feel the main problem with DA:A is that it lacks returning characters, other than Oghren and cameos. In practice I feel our Player Characters are very much defined by their relationships to the companions, so without that context the continuation of the story can feel a bit hollow.

I agree. For the most part, I didn't really get a good feel for the cast. Nathaniel and Sigrun were fun, but you don't spend a lot of time with them. I felt nothing for Anders, zombie Justice or Velanna. And then to make it worse, the one returning companion was reset to neutral.

[Revan Reborn]

I've yet to play any Witcher game, but I was curious about starting from the beginning, since I really hate beginning a series from a later entry unless the narratives have no real connection to each other, and this seems like something I would find a little frustrating. For all the faults in BioWare's games, I've always had fun with the way choices imported, for the most part.

What the previous poster stated is nothing more than nonsense. The import saves for TW2 are not broken. There are no major plot points that are even transferred, as the save import was added into development late and CDPR wasn't originally going to have one. All it does import is special armor and weapons Geralt receives near the end of TW1 as well as some minor decisions and a couple of NPCs to make parallels to the first game. The import function for TW3 will be A LOT more important as the decisions you made in TW2 will drastically change how TW3 plays out. Either way, I'd recommend playing all of the games. Otherwise, you will be confused by the plot and the characters.

 

From what I understand from fans Geralt is dead when these games take place so right there they are doing what they want.

"Death" is relative in The Witcher Universe. The entire premise of the three games is built around The Wild Hunt, which is one of the major aspects of the books.

 

One thing I learned from BSN is that it's always BioWare's fault.

You fail to see the point of this thread then. This is merely a suggestion to BioWare to see how the competition is approaching post-release content. In my opinion, expansions are better than just DLC add-ons, and most of BioWare's DLC add-ons aren't anything to rave about. Awakening, on the other hand, was actually really good. I'd rather get one or two massive expansions with a great story rather than half a dozen DLC add-ons that could be forgettable and boring as Pinnacle Station, Bring Down the Sky, most of the DAO DLC, etc.

 

I'm sorry, but what? The fact that an expansion has to be coupled with the main game is a dead giveaway that the expansion does not sell well without it.

Your assertion is illogical. The only reason Awakening was coupled with the main game later on suggests it was popular enough that people would be willing to buy a bundle of both with the UE selling at full price. Had Awakening been a failure, EA wouldn't have bothered creating the bundle to start. Contrary to popular belief, EA had to spend money to create the bundle as the hard copies of the game had to be distributed to various retailers around the world. It wasn't as "free" as many are making it out to be.

 

 

...

 

I would actually respond to each point of your post if the entire argument wasn't entirely wrong. I'm not arguing BioWare should have a season pass. Where in any of my post do I suggest that? As a result, there is nothing for me to rebut as you are entirely off-topic. I want BioWare to return to making expansions and not underwhelming DLCs at ridiculous prices. I could care less whether a season pass is involved or not. Go back and re-read through my posts.

[Silfren]

Or maybe it's because you get people coming along later and realizing that buying the Ultimate Edition is cheaper than buying the game and its dlcs separately. That was certainly the case when I bought the Legendary Edition for Skyrim.

 

And the fact that by the time those people are coming along, the Ultimate Edition may be the only edition on the shelves, or they see it next to the base game and look them over just enough to realize that the Ultimate Edition has more content for roughly the same price.

[Revan Reborn]

Bioware released the storage chest and the armor tint and they will release the black market. But they are stupid because these add-ons are in patches, not DLC. So players bash Bioware for launching an unpolished game. On the other hand, CDP already announced they will release 16 DLCs which are just like hairstyles and so on. And players praise them because those are 'free DLCs', not 'patches'! How clever CDP is!

And Bioware is also bashed for releasing a $15-DLC. Again, CDP is so clever and they said they will release an 'expansion pass'. It is not DLC, not 'season pass', but 'expansion'! Well,there will be 'Season One' and 'Season Two', but that's EXPANSION, just like the good old golden days! How clever!

The 16 DLCs for TW3 are more than just "hairstyles." The packs are also adding quite a few new quests, which I would value as quality content. I believe there are also new outfits and gear sets as well coming, among other things.

 

Look at it from a mathematical standpoint. Jaws of Hakkon, a standard BioWare DLC these days, lasts at most 10 hours and costs $14.99. Whereas CDPR is stating they are releasing not one, but two expansions. One of which at least rivals the content but probably exceeds Jaws of Hakkon, and another double in size with a brand new area to explore.

 

These together are being sold at the standard price of a season pass for $24.99. To break it down even further, each expansion for CDPR will cost $12.49 individually, making them cheaper than Jaws of Hakkon while offering more content. I'd say CDPR's deal is already a lot better than BioWare's, regardless of this debate about "expansions" and "DLC." The only other system BioWare will even support is the game shop, as EA has to monetize all of its games.

 

Holyshit that article is hilarious, I totally forgot about that. Man, got to love a good PR white lie now and then.

What's ironic is he is merely reinforcing my point that publishers and developers lie all the time... Yet, apparently there is some barrier around BioWare because they are paragons of "truth" and "fairness." Video games are a business. They aren't interested in doing what's best for the consumer. They are in the interest of making money. They'll spin any lies to justify why they aren't doing something and are doing something else.

 

So you accuse someone of throwing about insults, and then stoop to insults of your own. I guess you missed the hypocrisy.

I never used any insults. I am generally perplexed how the other poster could not understand the traditional meaning of the words in my post. That's not an insult in the slightest. You may want to re-read.

 

All fair points and a question: "What is the difference between an expansion pack and a DLC?" Is it file size, price, amount of content, or something else?

All of those things are typically characteristics. Expansions, as I've stated multiple times, are also standalone experiences that can be played in isolation of the main game. They also used to be sold separately in hard copy form, much like most expansions for MMORPGs. DLC is a broad and ambiguous term, as anything from horse armor to the Citadel is termed "DLC." JoH in many ways is a stripped and miniature expansion of sorts, not big enough nor having enough content, improvements, and additions to the game to justify it being anything more.

 

Expansions: Tribunal, Bloodmoon, Shivering Isles, Awakening

DLC: All of BioWare's post-release content besides Awakening.

 

You should be able to see the differences rather clearly.

 

And the OP still can't give a meaningful reason why Skyrim's Dragonborn is an expansion by his definition, but JoH is but a lowly DLC pack.

BGS never claimed Dragonborn was an expansion. The last time they made an expansion was Shivering Isles. However, Dragonborn shares many characteristics with expansions BGS made in the past. JoH is DLC largely because it's very small in comparison. Not to mention, BioWare has been rather clear that JoH is only DLC and that they weren't going to do expansions for DAI.

 

Nowhere. Revan posted some mediocre reviews and imaginary VGChartz sales numbers and acted like that somehow made the expansion being successful a fact. Clearly we should conclude that Darrah is lying and that anyone who disagrees is a BioWare fanboy based on this overwhelming evidence.

Congratulations on the revisionist history. Honestly, posts like these are entirely inappropriate and derail the intent of the thread. If you don't want an expansion and are fine with BioWare's current DLC model, just say so. Don't warp reality via the Straw Man in order to appear as a "knight in shining armor." Only those gullible enough not to read the thread, themselves, will fall for your tactics.

[Heimdall]

BGS never claimed Dragonborn was an expansion. The last time they made an expansion was Shivering Isles. However, Dragonborn shares many characteristics with expansions BGS made in the past. JoH is DLC largely because it's very small in comparison. Not to mention, BioWare has been rather clear that JoH is only DLC and that they weren't going to do expansions for DAI.

Frankly, I think you're dramatically overestimating the size of Dragonborn, but that doesn't really matter

 

And I'm not impressed by your picking and choosing which dev to grant authority to.  BGS never called it an expansion and billed it instead simply as an add-on, but you're fine with classifying it as an expansion.  But Bioware bills JoH as a DLC and you take that as gospel?

 

Again, if size is the defining factor than you're just quibbling about bigger or smaller content packs.