812 réponses à ce sujet

[AWTEW]

How about no?

[Heimdall]

Well, most distinctions are arbitrary to some extent. I don't think it's very sensible to get hung up on whether or not "expansion" is a thing -- if that isn't the case , the debate just moves to whether one big relatively cheap DLC is better than several smaller ones.

I don't mind having that debate. I just don't like it when people keep throwing around phrases like "they don't do expansions anymore!" To appeal to the "good ol' days" of gaming.

Content is content. Bad content can exist in expansions or small DLC. If what people want is more content, I'd prefer it if they just said it instead of phrasing it as if expansions are qualitatively better. (And they aren't, some are terrible, Awakening was and still is a buggy mess)

[X Equestris]

This is why it's important to understand the distinction from just a base game and an expansion. In isolation, DA:A did exceptionally well. The problem when one just looks at statistics or numbers without a full context is you largely come away with the wrong impression of what is happening. Numbers are a supplement to an answer, not the answer itself.

Looking at the stats immediately available via the PS4, Awakening has lower completion rates than the dlcs that came before it. This follows the general trend of the longer after release something comes out, the less likely people are to get it. For example, 19% of PS3 players have the trophy for completing Wardens's Keep. 12.1% completed Return to Ostagar. The highest completion rate for any Awakening story mission is 11.8% for escaping the silverite mines. Only 9.9% of people actually beat the expansion. It keeps going down until you get to Witch Hunt, where it bumps back up a little, which has a 7.6% completion rate.

[Revan Reborn]

I find it funny that for all the elitism in The Witcher community, they sure can eat easily classic PR marketing and at the same time be enraged at the "biodrones". This is a season pass, they can change the name if they want but it is still content being offered in a pack before the game is even out. Also 30 hours of content for less than half of the price of the game is a joke, at least for the supposed fandom standards.

Personally I think it is good for them, everyone is doing it and if CDPR can release a good product, why should they do it? they have a bigger company now, it is normal to get in the DLC train.

Either way really hype for this game too, hope their open world is good and not a hindrance for the quality of the story.  

There's a lot wrong with this post.

 

For one, this isn't a "CDPR vs BioWare" or any other nonsense. I was a BioWare fan long before CDPR was even making games. Again, CDPR has a lot of their success because they were heavily influenced and inspired by BioWare. CDPR is a huge fan of BioWare (in case you didn't notice by the similarities in the games)!

 

Second, nobody is claiming the "expansion pass" isn't a "season pass." What is important to note, however, is that most season passes offer one, small story expansion with some side quests and other miscelaneous additions. The Witcher 3's season pass is offering two expansions instead, a dying breed of content for RPGs, which is why it's called an "expansion pass."

 

Third, 30 hours of content for the standard price of a season pass, which offers a lot less content than 30 hours, is an exceptionally good deal. Look at every season pass EA, Ubisoft, or Activision has done. None of them even come close to the amount of value and content. Even look at Battlefield premium... You are essentially paying $49.99 for more maps and some weapons and vehicles... That's an EA game, in case you didn't know. It doesn't matter whether you are a fan of CDPR or not, if you cannot recognize how gamer-friendly they are, you are either blind or fail to understand basic comparisons.

 

There is no "DLC train." All of TW3's DLC is free, unlike every other game in the industry. What isn't free is the two expansions, and we haven't seen a proper expansion in a game since arguably Dragonborn and of course Awakening.

[Revan Reborn]

Looking at the stats immediately available via the PS4, Awakening has lower completion rates than the dlcs that came before it. This follows the general trend of the longer after release something comes out, the less likely people are to get it. For example, 19% of PS3 players have the trophy for completing Wardens's Keep. 12.1% completed Return to Ostagar. The highest completion rate for any Awakening story mission is 11.8% for escaping the silverite mines. Only 9.9% of people actually beat the expansion. It keeps going down until you get to Witch Hunt, where it bumps back up a little, which has a 7.6% completion rate.

There's one crucial fact you are forgetting, however. DAO was the first BioWare game to come to PS3 (a Sony console). Believe it or not, BioWare was largely an Xbox exclusive. From 2003 to 2007 (KotOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect), BioWare had only released games for the Xbox and Xbox 360. It wasn't until BioWare was purchased by EA that they began making their games multi-platform.

 

The reason this bit of information is important is because BioWare didn't have a fan base on a Sony console at this point. If anybody knew or loved BioWare, it's because they were either a PC gamer or an Xbox gamer. Thus, that's why the numbers for DAO and DA:A are exceptionally lower on the PS3. Things have since changed and BioWare is equally popular on both platforms, but it's worth understanding the PS3 statistics aren't entirely reliable.

[In Exile]

I don't mind having that debate. I just don't like it when people keep throwing around phrases like "they don't do expansions anymore!" To appeal to the "good ol' days" of gaming.

Content is content. Bad content can exist in expansions or small DLC. If what people want is more content, I'd prefer it if they just said it instead of phrasing it as if expansions are qualitatively better. (And they aren't, some are terrible, Awakening was and still is a buggy mess)

 

The thing is an expansion pack isn't a type of product you can separate out of the mode of distribution that was necessary for video-games back before digital downloads became commonplace. 

 

To sell an add-on to a game you had to package it and sell it retail. To justify the cost of doing so (even at a reduced pricepoint) you had to include a great deal of content. 

 

What we see as DLC right now is similarly the product of modes of distribution, only it has to do with how much information old gen consoles could download in one block based on certification etc. requirements. 

 

Now that we're seeing digital downloads on consoles for a full game, we could potentially see DLC released with prices and content closer to the old expansion packs. 

[AlanC9]

It's not horrible at all when DA:A sold better cumulatively than some standalone AAA titles also featured in the various charts on that site. We are talking about an expansion competing on equal footing with base games. The other DLC in DAO doesn't even come close to the numbers that DA:A generated.

Do you have data to back this up? I've never seen anything solid on DLC sales figures.

[Mihura]

There's a lot wrong with this post.

 

For one, this isn't a "CDPR vs BioWare" or any other nonsense. I was a BioWare fan long before CDPR was even making games. Again, CDPR has a lot of their success because they were heavily influenced and inspired by BioWare. CDPR is a huge fan of BioWare (in case you didn't notice by the similarities in the games)!

 

Second, nobody is claiming the "expansion pass" isn't a "season pass." What is important to note, however, is that most season passes offer one, small story expansion with some side quests and other miscelaneous additions. The Witcher 3's season pass is offering two expansions instead, a dying breed of content for RPGs, which is why it's called an "expansion pass."

 

Third, 30 hours of content for the standard price of a season pass, which offers a lot less content than 30 hours, is an exceptionally good deal. Look at every season pass EA, Ubisoft, or Activision has done. None of them even come close to the amount of value and content. Even look at Battlefield premium... You are essentially paying $49.99 for more maps and some weapons and vehicles... That's an EA game, in case you didn't know. It doesn't matter whether you are a fan of CDPR or not, if you cannot recognize how gamer-friendly they are, you are either blind or fail to understand basic comparisons.

 

There is no "DLC train." All of TW3's DLC is free, unlike every other game in the industry. What isn't free is the two expansions, and we haven't seen a proper expansion in a game since arguably Dragonborn and of course Awakening.

 

Obvious I was not talking about you but the people that like to call the fandom here, biodrones even when they like CDPR too.

The expansions are "Content that can be downloaded", it is not a full game like the old days. So yes it is the DLC train, there is nothing wrong with that, I just find it funny that people like to come up with strange justifications when it comes to CDPR.

[X Equestris]

There's one crucial fact you are forgetting, however. DAO was the first BioWare game to come to PS3 (a Sony console). Believe it or not, BioWare was largely an Xbox exclusive. From 2003 to 2007 (KotOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect), BioWare had only released games for the Xbox and Xbox 360. It wasn't until BioWare was purchased by EA that they began making their games multi-platform.
 
The reason this bit of information is important is because BioWare didn't have a fan base on a Sony console at this point. If anybody knew or loved BioWare, it's because they were either a PC gamer or an Xbox gamer. Thus, that's why the numbers for DAO and DA:A are exceptionally lower on the PS3. Things have since changed and BioWare is equally popular on both platforms, but it's worth understanding the PS3 statistics aren't entirely reliable.

Similar rates are found on the 360 and PC. And similar drop off rates show up in other Bioware titles, and games in general. Besides, there are still people buying games that came out years ago. Those people add to those stats.

There's no need to be patronizing.

[X Equestris]

There is no "DLC train." All of TW3's DLC is free, unlike every other game in the industry. What isn't free is the two expansions, and we haven't seen a proper expansion in a game since arguably Dragonborn and of course Awakening.

If you're talking about RPGs, you might be correct, but there are other games that have done expansions since then, you know.

[AlanC9]

There is no "DLC train." All of TW3's DLC is free, unlike every other game in the industry. What isn't free is the two expansions, and we haven't seen a proper expansion in a game since arguably Dragonborn and of course Awakening.

All of the announced DLC, anyway.

[BobZilla84]

I am getting TW3 and you can bet your *** I'm getting the Expansion Pass I am a diehard RPG Guy thus Bioware,CDProject Red,Bethesda,Square Enix,Obsidian and Atlus games always get my attention "And Money lol".
But i am not gonna debate the merits of The Witcher Franchise with anyone you know different folks and all.

[Heimdall]

The thing is an expansion pack isn't a type of product you can separate out of the mode of distribution that was necessary for video-games back before digital downloads became commonplace.

To sell an add-on to a game you had to package it and sell it retail. To justify the cost of doing so (even at a reduced pricepoint) you had to include a great deal of content.

What we see as DLC right now is similarly the product of modes of distribution, only it has to do with how much information old gen consoles could download in one block based on certification etc. requirements.

Now that we're seeing digital downloads on consoles for a full game, we could potentially see DLC released with prices and content closer to the old expansion packs.

That's actually what I mean. I don't begrudge the term expansion for all time, just the distinction between was is now arbitrarily labeled "expansion" and what is now arbitrarily labeled "just DLC".

As far as I can tell the label "expansion pack" is mostly used to appeal to nostalgia in current usage without denoting a real specific difference in what the product contains.

[Revan Reborn]

Obvious I was not talking about you but the people that like to call the fandom here, biodrones even when they like CDPR too.

The expansions are "Content that can be downloaded", it is not a full game like the old days. So yes it is the DLC train, there is nothing wrong with that, I just find it funny that people like to come up with strange justifications when it comes to CDPR.

Fair enough. I'm a massive fan of both and it's largely because they are very similar in their philosophy of building games. Great characters. Great story. Great choices. Both developers have a lot more similarities than differences.

 

I don't believe any developer is beyond fault. Nobody is perfect and even the best developers in the world will make mistakes. I think what's different with CDPR is they seem to have the philosophy of RPG developers from decades ago. Nothing of what they are doing is necessarily new, but it can come across that way as RPGs have evolved a lot in twenty years.

 

We can play tug-a-war and go back in forth on this all day, but TW3 isn't just making a typical dlc that you'd get in most AAA games. 30 hours of content is impressive, regardless of what you call it, and it really is paying homage to old school RPGs that actually did have expansios that were that size. I think that really speaks to CDPR's integrity and their vision as not only developers but RPG gamers themseves.

[In Exile]

That's about all you could expect, DA:O completion stats being what they are

 

True; but that just shows the problem with expansions and add-on content in general. You're capping yourself to the subset of people who want more of the same. That's a large part of why the price-point has to be greater for DLC content, since you've narrowed your audience so greatly. That's not to justify current DLC prices, but given how video-games have just become so cheap over the years (comparatively, given inflation) I don't mind developers finding creative ways to subsidize their products beyond mass appeal. 

[In Exile]

That's actually what I mean. I don't begrudge the term expansion for all time, just the distinction between was is now arbitrarily labeled "expansion" and what is now arbitrarily labeled "just DLC".

As far as I can tell the label "expansion pack" is mostly used to appeal to nostalgia in current usage without denoting a real specific difference in what the product contains.

 

Oh, I agree entirely, especially with the nostalgia comment. I didn't mean to suggest I was disagreeing; rather it was my intention just to build on how the distinction is arbitrary and really the product of historical accident. 

[AlanC9]

Bad content can exist in expansions or small DLC. If what people want is more content, I'd prefer it if they just said it instead of phrasing it as if expansions are qualitatively better. (And they aren't, some are terrible, Awakening was and still is a buggy mess)

Well, the argument seems to be that expansions have better value. Which is, of course, true.

[BobZilla84]

You know 30 hours of Content thats nothing to turn you nose up at especially with how many people are bitching about Dlc being too short and all so TW3 may have one up on DAI dlc wise.I hope the rest of DAI s Dlc will be Story driven not more open world non sense.
Off Topic:
You know another thing that annoys me is B-Wares choice to release the Black Emporium in May and not in April that one is confusing and irratating as hell.

[Revan Reborn]

It's content.  I download it.  Downloadable content.  D - L - C.  I really couldn't care less about goofy arguments as to the differences between what should be considered "DLC" or "expansion."

 

Also, I am so dang sick of hearing about Witcher here  on BSN.  This isn't the company that makes Witcher, and Dragon Age isn't Witcher.  If people want things like Witcher does it... PLAY WITCHER.  I mean, seriously, what's wrong with a little diversity in how gaming companies operate and make games?  I own Witcher 1 and 2, but I can almost guarantee you I won't ever be buying Witcher 3 based primarily how poisoned I am at the very mention of that name because of people here saying crap like "why can't dragon age blah blah blah witcher blah blah blah."

 

*gets off soapbox*

You miss the point of Capitalism as a system then. This isn't a "BioWare make DAI like TW3!" thread. This is a "here's a developer doing something you should heavily consider in the future." Competition is good and it forces developers to have to step up to the plate and make better products, in theory.

 

As stated previously, BioWare used to do expansions. This isn't something they'd steal from CDPR. It's just ironic CDPR is doing something that BioWare used to do. Now, BioWare seems to be completely opposed to the idea of actually doing an expansion and it's largely because of EA. This is a problem as a consumer.

 

If you could care less about the content BioWare is providing to DAI post-release, why even bother posting? You certainly haven't contributed to the discussion in any meaningful way by showing your lack of understanding of the subject-matter.

[Mihura]

Fair enough. I'm a massive fan of both and it's largely because they are very similar in their philosophy of building games. Great characters. Great story. Great choices. Both developers have a lot more similarities than differences.

 

I don't believe any developer is beyond fault. Nobody is perfect and even the best developers in the world will make mistakes. I think what's different with CDPR is they seem to have the philosophy of RPG developers from decades ago. Nothing of what they are doing is necessarily new, but it can come across that way as RPGs have evolved a lot in twenty years.

 

We can play tug-a-war and go back in forth on this all day, but TW3 isn't just making a typical dlc that you'd get in most AAA games. 30 hours of content is impressive, regardless of what you call it, and it really is paying homage to old school RPGs that actually did have expansios that were that size. I think that really speaks to CDPR's integrity and their vision as not only developers but RPG gamers themseves.

 

Agree with everything, also a big fan of CDPR but I just cannot stand the general mentality of most of their community, especially recently. It is like people cannot have valid critiques and like both game. All the praise I have seen for this expansion pass is ridiculous when compared to the elitist mentality. 

Also I agree their content even the paid DLC is gonna to be better than most, that I have no doubt.

[LinksOcarina]

So the vast majority of people hate season pass schemes and DLC like this, especially from games like Assassins Creed, Borderlands, or other EA projects that utilized season passes before people complained about them too much and decided to remove it from their repertoire. 

 

Yet when CD Projekt Red does it....it's ok because of...some vague reason regarding the content promised by being labeled as an expansion pack?

 

Man, you guys are hypocrites.

[In Exile]

You miss the point of Capitalism as a system then. This isn't a "BioWare make DAI like TW3!" thread. This is a "here's a developer doing something you should heavily consider in the future." Competition is good and it forces developers to have to step up to the plate and make better products, in theory.

 

As stated previously, BioWare used to do expansions. This isn't something they'd steal from CDPR. It's just ironic CDPR is doing something that BioWare used to do. Now, BioWare seems to be completely opposed to the idea of actually doing an expansion and it's largely because of EA. This is a problem as a consumer.

 

If you could care less about the content BioWare is providing to DAI post-release, why even bother posting? You certainly haven't contributed to the discussion in any meaningful way by showing your lack of understanding of the subject-matter.

 

If we're going to start fellating pre-EA Bioware, then it's important to point out they were pioneers in the DLC business with the NWN premium modules, which went over as well as you'd think. 

[robertthebard]

That sounds more like EA speaking for BioWare than anything else. It also sounds like typical PR to make excuses for not giving gamers what they want. Regardless of how factually accurate Mr. Darrah's words are, does anybody actually remember the DLC in DA2? That is my point. Make it too short and sweet and it will often be forgettable. The expansion wouldn't even necessarily need to be as large as Awakening. Take cues from BGS with Dawnguard and Dragonborn. They were big and massive, yet probably not too much to the detriment of development. There is a fine line to walk.
 
I don't believe the myth that expansions don't sell and DLC does. That is nothing more than investors spinning reality to justify giving us very little at bloated prices. EA, Ubisoft, and Activision are infamous for their "season passes" that provide very little content and ridiculous prices. CDPR has the luxury of being independent and not owned by one of the large publishers, while BGS has full autonomy as well because ZeniMax Media Inc. is a private corporation and not public. Thus, it's not surprising they are able to make massive and impressive expansions while everybody else is charging $5-15 for barely any content. It's a matter of politics.

So when the Exec Producer says something contrary to what you believe, it's a conspiracy. Got it.

Instead of telling us what you believe we should believe, produce some numbers to back up your conspiracy theory. You have twice now indicated that Awakening sold quite well, both on it's own and as part of a package. Provide the links to where you're pulling this data from. I don't want "Because I think/said so", I want to see actual sales numbers that support your claim. Awakening was ok, to me. I played it once, maybe twice. Compared to the number of times I played through Origins, and ME 1-3 however, I didn't play it at all. So I need to see some numbers, not some more speculation where even Developer comments about why are disregarded. Can you provide that, or am I going to be wading through a lot more "But I'm right because ..."?