As a big fan of both CD Project Red and Bioware i find this topic bizarre.
I'm glad CD Project Red has finally announced paid for DLC/expansion content to go alongside their free DLC but until we actually get our hands on it we have no idea how it'll measure up. Personally Bioware's got a pretty decent record of creating largish story content DLC's(LOTSB, Mark of Assassin, Legacy etc).
I couldn't disagree more. I don't see it as self-entitlement to expect quality and to have standards when purchasing anything--whether it's $10 or $100. I think a lot of people miss the point about the "too expensive" argument. For the most part, I don't think people believe $15.00 is a huge amount of money, but it's more than what the value of the product is worth to them. You can't fault someone for being a smart consumer and simply saying, "This doesn't seem like a value to me, think I'll pass.". It's not saying, "Anyone who buys this dlc is a fool.".
I fully understand companies have to make money in order to make it and I am 100% on board for supporting a company that I admire and love, but if I felt the quality was slipping or becoming a product that does not meet their usual standard, I won't buy it. It only facilitates that a subpar product is acceptable and doesn't encourage them to strive to improve. If you think the product is up to standard, then by all means spend your money, but don't call those who disagree with you "entitled". I think that is a problem in this thread and in threads where people call JoH overpriced (believe me, it isn't only forumites on the BSN that feel this way). They take it too personally. They feel it invalidates their decision to purchase the product and they feel like it's a personal affront if someone doesn't enjoy it as much as they did. It isn't personal. I can't speak for everyone, but I certainly don't care if you want to shell out money for something you find entertaining. I am glad you enjoyed it, but your enjoyment and devotion has nothing to do with my money and my decisions as a consumer.
I think a lot of people are also missing the point of the OP. He wasn't saying anything disrespectful against Bioware. He was saying, "I feel this is a good thing, maybe Bioware should look into this." The way some people are reacting, you'd think he called out their mother. He thinks this is a good deal. I agree. Some don't. No reason to get bothered and offended by it. (not saying you personally, speaking in general)
I remember reading a lot of threads about JoH being too expensive and defenders were quick to point out that $15 wasn't a lot of money and that they would buy it regardless because they love and support Bioware, now some of those same people are in this thread stating how it's silly to think this CDPR SP is a good idea and that people shouldn't be excited about it because it isn't even out yet. Again, not speaking for others, I love Bioware--that being said, I have been a bit disappointed with some of their choices recently. As I said earlier, I feel as though the quality isn't what it used to be and if a friend had not bought me JoH as a gift, I most likely wouldn't have purchased it unless it went on sale or at all. I haven't been disappointed yet by CDPR, so I think this is a good deal and seeing as how I have never been disappointed, I will buy this SP. If it turns out to be subpar, they'll get the same treatment and I won't purchase their dlc anymore. That simple. It isn't entitlement--it's just how I choose to spend my hard earned money, just as your choices about your money are your own.
Thank you. Very eloquently put. Part of the reason I find it so frustrating to post anything on BSN is because people are so sensitive and defensive when it comes to anything. Whether it's BioWare fanboys "coming to the rescue" or posters "instantly attacking" any suggestions or ideas that aren't from a "BioWare game," it's silly and counterproductive towards why we are all here: great products from a great developer. I'm fairly certain no one here "hates" BioWare, and certainly no one is hoping they "go out of business" and can't "support their families." As if that would happen anyways considering how popular BioWare is as a video game developer...
If you are perfectly content with BioWare's DLC policy and love Jaws of Hakkon, wonderful. Post your thoughts, explain why you believe shorter story DLC priced at $14.99 is a better value, and move on. Otherwise, you merely detract from the discussion and derail the topic because someone happens to have a suggestion or valid constructive criticism for BioWare's model. Contrary to popular belief, BioWare isn't infallible. I know this may come as a shock to some of you, but they are only human like the rest of us and Electronic Arts is a publicly-traded major third party publisher. With these realizations comes certain policies and ways of doing business.
I've been a fan of BioWare for a long time; long before they were a subsidiary of Electronic Arts and long after. With every new release and title they put on the market, I determine my personal pros and cons and then make an informed list of things I'd like to see improved in the future. As I've stated many times, I haven't particularly been a fan of BioWare's DLC policy since Mass Effect (yes, I have all of it). It doesn't compare to the value and enjoyment I received from Awakening, which was massive and actually cheaper in comparison to the individual DLCs only in ME2 or ME3 combined. Thus, I'd prefer to have one Awakening-quality expansion for a Mass Effect game rather than a half a dozen Pinnacle Stations or something of poor quality. That's just my opinion, but again, as this is a "forum," a place of discussion for all form of ideas, it has a place with everything else here.
If this violates your personal dignity and is so abhorrent to your conscious, you don't have to post in this thread. You don't have to agree with me and I'm not forcing you to. Believe me, if you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything at all. You do yourself a favor and the moderators when they don't have to clean up a thread due to posters taking it off topic or resulting to blatant insults for no particular purpose or reason. CDPR is highly-respected and very popular, especially amongst PC gamers, for a reason. This isn't just smoke and hidden mirrors. They have and continue to offer one of the best gamer-friendly relationships in the game industry today. If you have ever played TW1 or TW2, you would know exactly what kind of customer service and experience CDPR offers. It's quite frankly unrivaled in terms of the value and dedication with only a short list of other developers coming to mind.
Until CDPR gives me reason to believe their commitment to gamers is slipping, I will use them as a standard for all developers to strive and rival. That is the point of Capitalism. Competition that compels other companies to make products of equivalent value so that prices lower and the consumer benefits. Based on their rhetoric, what they are offering, and the value of their product, it's a better deal than what BioWare is currently offering. Not everybody has to agree, which is why this is on a BioWare forum. Civil discourse is the point when people can do it respectfully.
The fact that you dismiss all criticism against your ideas as:
"BioWare fanboys "coming to the rescue" or posters "instantly attacking" any suggestions or ideas that aren't from a 'BioWare game,'"
Makes it very difficult to take you seriously.
Aye, It's as if the OP doesn't even bother actually reading the posts, and just assumes that everyone who's not on his side is a mindless Bioware drone.
There have been numerous arguments put foward as to why people are leery of this disguised season pass and/or don't think Bioware should do something like that. If you want to dismiss all those criticisms of your criticism as fanboyism, fine, but it means you seek an echo chamber to prove how right you are, not an actual discussion.
On top of the ridiculous mental gymnastics required to make one say that having less content actually equals more content, I'm really done with this thread. You have your opinion, OP, good on you. But if you wanted to put together a convincing argument, sorry to say, you failed. Hard.
Is it really? Many never even finished DAII because it was such a "terrible" game supposedly. I enjoyed it quite a bit, but it has a tarnished reputation. I doubt that many even invested in the DLC for it, whether it was good or not. Legacy was decent, but the Felicia Day stuff was fan service.
I don't believe anyone would say ME DLC is "essential."
In terms of DLC, I would say "Leviathan" and "From Ashes" are quite essential to the story. Both fill in some narrative gaps in the game. Unlike Omega or Citadel DLC, which is not at all relevant and carries a much different tone compared to the rest.
If you're gonna get it, it requires you to get the DLCs that come with it. ME2's DLCs were optional. ME3's DLCs fix mistakes.
Definitely get the DLCs if you do get it. I love ME 3 and have defended it like hell and often angrily on these boards to the point where I almost got permabanned but obviously not everyone cared for it. The DLCs I would consider a must would be From Ashes, Leviathan, and the Extended Cut. Omega is alright, and Citadel is a ton of fun but not necessary.
Especially since the DLC never goes on sale, that's just corporate greed.
Aye, It's as if the OP doesn't even bother actually reading the posts, and just assumes that everyone who's not on his side is a mindless Bioware drone.
There have been numerous arguments put foward as to why people are leery of this disguised season pass and/or don't think Bioware should do something like that. If you want to dismiss all those criticisms of your criticism as fanboyism, fine, but it means you seek an echo chamber to prove how right you are, not an actual discussion.
On top of the ridiculous mental gymnastics required to make one say that having less content actually equals more content, I'm really done with this thread. You have your opinion, OP, good on you. But if you wanted to put together a convincing argument, sorry to say, you failed. Hard.
Again, you further prove my point you aren't actually reading the thread. This isn't about "season passes" or BioWare copying CDPR's illusive "season pass" marketing. This is about expansions and DLC and why I believe BioWare should go back to the former. Until you actually understand what the thread is actually about, you may as well be a "BioWare fanboy" raging voraciously because you are missing the point and aren't answering the call of the question.
The more you continue trying to fight me instead of actually discussing the true purpose of the thread further reinforces my point that you aren't here for civil discourse.
...
In general, the quality of the content for ME is usually good. Personally, I'd only say Citadel and LotSB are actually worth their price, but none of it is terrible. I just don't like the fact that character companions are cut out and some of the DLC (Leviathan) answers important questions about the main premise of the base game. Why would that not be in the base game? To me, it's a disservice to fans when you are withholing information and forcing them to go through a pay wall to have all the answers. The quality of Mass Effect DLC is decent, but the way in which is delivered is a serious issue, in my opinion.
Like what many posters have already said, BioWare has said that it is not viable to do a expansion like Awakening anymore because of the limited profit margins. I am sure the planned 'DLC' that was cancelled for DA2 (Exalted March) was meant to be in the scale of Awakening and to close off Hawke's chapter. Unfortunately (or fortunately), it was cancelled (most probably by EA) because they do not think it would make money. And they decided to focus on DAI instead and DAI is much much better than DA2 (IMHO) because of the additional effort put into it.
Cooperation only emulate to max their own profits/benefits. It is just the way the world work (unfortunately). So unless the game is really really bad, I am ok with the money spent. TBH, JoH is really not bad and worth the $15.
Anyway, until we see the quality of TW3 and its expansion, it is premature to praise them to the skies too early. And i thought we all learnt our lesson with DA2 and ME3 (and those games partly failed because so much expectations were piled on to them that they are unlikely to match it) and i kind of think TW3 will suffer the same fate. I mean ME3 producers promised us the earth and sky but the ending just did not match up to it. Almost none of your previous choices matters (unlike how they said they would). Not going to say CDPR will do the same but it is pre-mature to say they will not. And if they really did deliver what they promised, kudos to them. Hopefully their game sell millions and perhaps then, EA/BioWare will try to emulate their success (but again even if they did, it was to make money, not to satisfy fans).
In general, the quality of the content for ME is usually good. Personally, I'd only say Citadel and LotSB are actually worth their price, but none of it is terrible. I just don't like the fact that character companions are cut out and some of the DLC (Leviathan) answers important questions about the main premise of the base game. Why would that not be in the base game? To me, it's a disservice to fans when you are withholing information and forcing them to go through a pay wall to have all the answers. The quality of Mass Effect DLC is decent, but the way in which is delivered is a serious issue, in my opinion.
Many people have confronted you over the issue of DLC and expansions, your arbitrary distinction between the two, and the merits of Bioware taking cues from an untried business strategy from a developer that has yet to produce the content in question. You've either dismissed them too or simply refused to answer.Again, you further prove my point you aren't actually reading the thread. This isn't about "season passes" or BioWare copying CDPR's illusive "season pass" marketing. This is about expansions and DLC and why I believe BioWare should go back to the former. Until you actually understand what the thread is actually about, you may as well be a "BioWare fanboy" raging voraciously because you are missing the point and aren't answering the call of the question.
The more you continue trying to fight me instead of actually discussing the true purpose of the thread further reinforces my point that you aren't here for civil discourse.
In general, the quality of the content for ME is usually good. Personally, I'd only say Citadel and LotSB are actually worth their price, but none of it is terrible. I just don't like the fact that character companions are cut out and some of the DLC (Leviathan) answers important questions about the main premise of the base game. Why would that not be in the base game? To me, it's a disservice to fans when you are withholing information and forcing them to go through a pay wall to have all the answers. The quality of Mass Effect DLC is decent, but the way in which is delivered is a serious issue, in my opinion.
As you noted BioWare has heard the complaints about DLC companions. As for Leviathan, the easy answer is that Leviathan wasn't actually about the origin of the Catalyst until after the ending debacle, when fans really made it known that they wanted to know wtf was going on with the Catalyst. From Mac's notes we know BioWare really did plan on leaving it vague and (virtually) unexplained, and then changed their mind after the reception of the vanilla endings.
In other words, I don't think the practice of DLC is at fault for Leviathan, but rather poor planning and execution of the Catalyst plot twist in the vanilla game necessitating it.
I don't know if that's true though. Your rationale is based on the assumption that BioWare hadn't begun development of Leviathan yet, which studios always begin development of DLC even before the base game is released. As Leviathan was the first intended DLC (excluding the special case of EC), it's very likely it was already well into development before the controversy over the ME3 ending was even an issue. We know that Leviathan files were found via datamining in the EC and the voice actor for Leviathan confirmed the DLC existed well before it was released. The fact the VO had already been done for Leviathan (which happens later in game development) would lead me to believe Leviathan was already set in stone way before ME3 even released.
Before it was released maybe, but likely only in the late stages of development wen the base game was just about finished.I don't know if that's true though. Your rationale is based on the assumption that BioWare hadn't begun development of Leviathan yet, which studios always begin development of DLC even before the base game is released. As Leviathan was the first intended DLC (excluding the special case of EC), it's very likely it was already well into development before the controversy over the ME3 ending was even an issue. We know that Leviathan files were found via datamining in the EC and the voice actor for Leviathan confirmed the DLC existed well before it was released. The fact the VO had already been done for Leviathan (which happens later in game development) would lead me to believe Leviathan was already set in stone way before ME3 even released.
I don't know if that's true though. Your rationale is based on the assumption that BioWare hadn't begun development of Leviathan yet, which studios always begin development of DLC even before the base game is released. As Leviathan was the first intended DLC (excluding the special case of EC), it's very likely it was already well into development before the controversy over the ME3 ending was even an issue. We know that Leviathan files were found via datamining in the EC and the voice actor for Leviathan confirmed the DLC existed well before it was released. The fact the VO had already been done for Leviathan (which happens later in game development) would lead me to believe Leviathan was already set in stone way before ME3 even released.
Oh no, it definitely was. I was saying that the content of Leviathan itself (which was already planned) changed to incorporate an explanation about the Catalyst.
I don't have a direct source on that, so feel free to take it with a grain of salt.
I see. Even still, I see that as a far stretch. It was the first DLC BioWare was working on before the ending controversy and they quickly got EC out the door. The fact that the EC files had elements of Leviathan already included and the voice actor for Leviathan confirmed the DLC's existence before it was officially announced (his VO was done, thus the story and plot were set in stone), it's hard for me to believe BioWare changed the content of the DLC.
(Point of order, as I understand it, the Leviathan species didn't exist in the lore until they started brainstorming the Leviathan DLC. Another example of Bioware's deficiency in pre-planning, but it wasn't withheld from the main game.)
At least insofar as the ME series is concerned, Bioware's approach to plotting was effectively to make it up as they went along and it shows. This is why the game not only has plot holes (which can often happen with video games just because of how resources have to get shifted around or how content gets cut in production) but actually inconsistency from a thematic POV. ME2 is rife with this issue (though not as egrigious as the ME3 endings).
How is giving the cards a justification not a bias on favoritism? they were awful, Gearlt is not a fuckboy, that is Dandelion department. Witcher are promiscuous, hummm...... the word on the street is that they have living weapons without emotions, can you source that information for me? I am really curious about specific lore that supports their sexual appetites.
"No, CDPR is not misogynistic and their games don't reflect that." Oh this is hilarious and defensive where did I said that? can I do a hyperbole of your post too? Also where did I said Geralt was bi? I have some of the books and watched the TV series so... I kinda know who he is. I was talking about side characters.Both companies make mistakes, I am here because I still like them enough to care. Of course I am not on the witcher forum because it has lost the capacity for intelligent discussions, people wanting a Yen/Ciri/Triss thing is a really big sigh to run way.
I just hope CDPR does not lose themselves like Ubisoft a long the way, the season pass is a big step for that and I disagree, the best company for DLC is Paradox or Obsidian actually, Bioware should take notes on that, CDPR is too mainstream at this moment.
The books written by Sapovski, best selling author in Poland and creator of the Witcher.
Almost all sex cards refer specifically to one of Geralt's flings or love affairs in either the short novels or the Blood of the Elves' series. Speaking from a literary critic's point-of-view, they also embody clichés of typical love affairs in high fantasy books or even folk tales.
Sapovski's books are first and foremost a satire of tropes in high-fantasy, more so before the Blood of the Elves series.
CDPR was mainly trying to keep the video game adaptation coherent with the books.
The typical political correctness outrage twisted what was a simple wink - albeit a leery one- to the Polish fans into a mini-scandal.
Depressing.
At least insofar as the ME series is concerned, Bioware's approach to plotting was effectively to make it up as they went along and it shows. This is why the game not only has plot holes (which can often happen with video games just because of how resources have to get shifted around or how content gets cut in production) but actually inconsistency from a thematic POV. ME2 is rife with this issue (though not as egrigious as the ME3 endings).
This is one of the bigest problems with ME. Most likely because lead writer changed. Main theme unity true diversity changed to AI vs organics, and ending with "deep philosophical meaning" and failed hard. ME3 never was deep and philosophical it was space soup opera and good one.
This is one of the bigest problems with ME. Most likely because lead writer changed. Main theme unity true diversity changed to AI vs organics, and ending with "deep philosophical meaning" and failed hard. ME3 never was deep and philosophical it was space soup opera and good one.
I don't know if I necessarily agree with this. While I wouldn't say ME is meant to be as thought-provoking and philosophical as Star Trek, even the dark energy theory was meant to have some sort of philosophical point and an answer to the "ultimate question." The reapers were the "mystery of the galaxy" and that had been a concurring theme since ME1. The problem with the ending of ME3 originally is it wasn't really philosophical at all. It was just an ambiguous, vague, and poorly constructed mess that didn't provide any answers. That's not being philosophical.
This is one of the bigest problems with ME. Most likely because lead writer changed. Main theme unity true diversity changed to AI vs organics, and ending with "deep philosophical meaning" and failed hard. ME3 never was deep and philosophical it was space soup opera and good one.
Very arguable that this was the main theme of ME trilogy, especially considering the not-so-progressive ways you can conclude the major subplots (sabotaging genophage cure, killing geth or quarians). The only theme that really unites everything in Mass Effect is a contemplation of the nature of cycles, how they are formed, how they perpetuate, how you can end them (or if you can). And in this sense, the ending is very much thematically in tune with the rest of the series. Even the vanilla version.
I think the theme between games fluctuated too much to really say the trilogy as whole had a main theme.Very arguable that this was the main theme of ME trilogy, especially considering the not-so-progressive ways you can conclude the major subplots (sabotaging genophage cure, killing geth or quarians). The only theme that really unites everything in Mass Effect is a contemplation of the nature of cycles, how they are formed, how they perpetuate, how you can end them (or if you can). And in this sense, the ending is very much thematically in tune with the rest of the series. Even the vanilla version.
Actually, in ME1 the theme was meant to be the development of humanity into an intergalactic player, and what we're perceived to be is so strongly influenced by what we do at critical junctures. The reason why the ending scene changes based on P/R and whether the Council lived or died tied in with how Shepard's actions as "the tip of humanity's spear" (the marketing term at the time) influenced the perception of our species and our eventual role in the galaxy. This is also why Anderson/Udina give a big speech about humanity's future role in the galaxy.Very arguable that this was the main theme of ME trilogy, especially considering the not-so-progressive ways you can conclude the major subplots (sabotaging genophage cure, killing geth or quarians). The only theme that really unites everything in Mass Effect is a contemplation of the nature of cycles, how they are formed, how they perpetuate, how you can end them (or if you can). And in this sense, the ending is very much thematically in tune with the rest of the series. Even the vanilla version.
Actually, in ME1 the theme was meant to be the development of humanity into an intergalactic player, and what we're perceived to be is so strongly influenced by what we do at critical junctures. The reason why the ending scene changes based on P/R and whether the Council lived or died tied in with how Shepard's actions as "the tip of humanity's spear" (the marketing term at the time) influenced the perception of our species and our eventual role in the galaxy. This is also why Anderson/Udina give a big speech about humanity's future role in the galaxy.
ME2 dropped this plot like a hot potato.
I wouldn't say that. Humanity had become a player by the end of ME1. ME2 was about the reapers recognizing the resourcefulness of humanity, in particular Shepard, and trying to capitalize on that via the human reaper. In fact, ME2 largely is only about human exceptionalism and how their rise in the galaxy has caused a shift not only in the politics on the Citadel, but how the reapers perceive the various races in the galaxy. ME3 comes full-circle with the reapers hitting Earth first as they see humanity as the largest threat. This all merely feeds back into this idea of humanity's place in the galaxy and constantly reinforces this notion that there is something special and unique about humans. That line of thinking never disappeared. It simply evolved.
I wouldn't say that. Humanity had become a player by the end of ME1. ME2 was about the reapers recognizing the resourcefulness of humanity, in particular Shepard, and trying to capitalize on that via the human reaper. In fact, ME2 largely is only about human exceptionalism and how their rise in the galaxy has caused a shift not only in the politics on the Citadel, but how the reapers perceive the various races in the galaxy. ME3 comes full-circle with the reapers hitting Earth first as they see humanity as the largest threat. This all merely feeds back into this idea of humanity's place in the galaxy and constantly reinforces this notion that there is something special and unique about humans. That line of thinking never disappeared. It simply evolved.
Dragon Age 2 certainly does, but I was talking about the DLC. In any case, based on the only public metric I know of (PSN trophies) almost half of documented players finished Dragon Age 2, compared to Origins and Inquisition which both settle between 20-30%. Obviously part of that is shorter length, but I'm just responding to the point about "many" not finishing DA2.
Back in 2012 Bio presented these somewhat different figures: 41% completed DA2, 36% completed DA:O. So DA:O's a bit closer to catching up with DA2 on all platforms. Don't ask me why.
Actually, in ME1 the theme was meant to be the development of humanity into an intergalactic player, and what we're perceived to be is so strongly influenced by what we do at critical junctures. The reason why the ending scene changes based on P/R and whether the Council lived or died tied in with how Shepard's actions as "the tip of humanity's spear" (the marketing term at the time) influenced the perception of our species and our eventual role in the galaxy. This is also why Anderson/Udina give a big speech about humanity's future role in the galaxy.
ME2 dropped this plot like a hot potato.
Probably because it was ridiculous. I found the ME1 Renegade ending to be the most preposterous of the trilogy.
Probably because it was ridiculous.
I don't know if it was ridiculous, but it was ultimately limiting. Telling the story like that would have been extremely difficult from a POV of someone like Shepard and would have required humanity pushed as someone special rising to all those heights.
A fair argument is that the ME games pushed humanity as something special, but I would argue that the other races are treated much more equally to humanity in ME2 and ME3.
Retour en haut