672 réponses à ce sujet

[Hellion Rex]

They really should let people trade in their old-gen copies for current gen versions or give out vouchers or something. Really the only reasonable saving throw in this situation.

That would require both Microsoft and Sony's approval as well as individual retailers to actually sell these.

[Panda]

Wouldn't EA have to convince retailers to go along with it?

 

They could do same what happens with DLC's you have bought for old gen version already, with your PSN/Xbox live account you can download it for free if you have it already for old gen. So account has old gen DAI -> free DAI download.

 

Wouldn't be exactly trading, but option Bioware could make happen.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Wouldn't EA have to convince retailers to go along with it?

I remember gamestop doing something along those lines for the 360 to xbone games up to a certain date so it wouldn't be a first. Course they can circumvent retailers entirely by just giving out digital downloads.

 

That would require both Microsoft and Sony's approval as well as individual retailers to actually sell these.

 Never said it would be easy. Should happen though.

[Hellion Rex]

I remember gamestop doing something along those lines for the 360 to xbone games up to a certain date so it wouldn't be a first.

Never said it would be easy. Should happen though.

"Should" doesn't equal "will".

[AresKeith]

They could do same what happens with DLC's you have bought for old gen version already, with your PSN/Xbox live account you can download it for free if you have it already for old gen. So account has old gen DAI -> free DAI download.

 

Wouldn't be exactly trading, but option Bioware could make happen.

 

I remember gamestop doing something along those lines for the 360 to xbone games up to a certain date so it wouldn't be a first.

 

Here's hoping EA allows it 

[Cespar]

Wouldn't EA have to convince retailers to go along with it?

I'm sure that Sony and Microsoft will understand. The customers will be putting money in their pockets anyway by buying the new gen system. I'm pretty sure the retailer is going to be gamestop as usual.

[midnight tea]

I'm also a little disturbed that you think it's obvious next gen players matter more than last gen players.  But I suppose that's the core of the issue.  I don't find that I have much enthusiasm to give my money to a company who think it's worth less than someone else's. 

 

I think you should get used to being disturbed, since what I'm saying is not just my opinion. People using older products usually matter less for companies. Just like I, with my old iPod 2 (on which I can barely run anything now) and iPad classic, matter less for Apple, for example.

 

 

 

 

They didn't have to release it on last gen.  They chose to do so.  The honourable thing to do would be to continue supporting all platforms. 

 

Not if it costs them way too much money to do this. In any case - the DLC is yet to be out. We'll see if there would be any other announcement concerning the dropping of DLCs for old-gen consoles.

 

 

 

 

At the very least, I find the argument that next gen players matter more than last gen players to be selfish.  I can't see any way of spinning your argument that doesn't revolve around asking last gen players to go without so that next gen players can get extra.  After having been invited to dinner.

 

The same argument can be made about, say, Skyrim and availability of mods for PC players, which significantly prolonged the lifespan of the game and made it way more fun, despite the fact that the title sold like fresh buns on consoles. Yet, it happens.

 

Also - you're arguing that next-gen players mattering more is selfish, yet asking them to support dying consoles despite no financial benefits and holding back the experience for everyone isn't equally selfish?

[GreyLycanTrope]

"Should" doesn't equal "will".

Never equated the two.

[AresKeith]

I'm sure that Sony and Microsoft will understand. The customers will be putting money in their pockets anyway by buying the new gen system. I'm pretty sure the retailer is going to be gamestop as usual.

 

Sony and Microsoft most likely would go with it since they still get money from people buying the new consoles, and if GameStop has done it before in the past then all they need now is EA going with the idea

[Archdemon_Urthemiel]

Never equated the two.

So if bioware said all dlcs would be PC exclusive, you'd be okay? Bioware shouldn't have released some dlc and then come out wih this announcement if they intended to do this

[GreyLycanTrope]

So if bioware said all dlcs would be PC exclusive, you'd be okay? Bioware shouldn't have released some dlc and then come out wih this announcement if they intended to do this

What? Not sure where in my post I said anything remotely close to that. What I said was bioware "should" give out current gen version to people who already owned the game on old gen. Should.

 

The post your quote is me clarifying that this is what I think they should do so as to not screw over the old-gen fanbase entirely, but that this doesn't mean they will actually do it.

[beccatoria]

I think you should get used to being disturbed, since what I'm saying is not just my opinion. People using older products usually matter less for companies. Just like I, with my old iPod 2 (on which I can barely run anything now) and iPad classic, matter less for Apple, for example.

 

And as such I expect to have fewer games to choose from.  But if a game is made available to me, no, I don't expect to be treated as a second-class gamer in respect of that game when there was no price drop to recognise that it was an inferior product (and yes, capacity to upgrade in a base unit is usually taken into account when pricing things). 
 

 

Not if it costs them way too much money to do this. In any case - the DLC is yet to be out. We'll see if there would be any other announcement concerning the dropping of DLCs for old-gen consoles.

 

 

I was talking about what would be honourable, not what would be the most profitable.  Unless your position is that supporting last gen would be financially disasterous to them (in which case, I believe the burden of proof would be on you), then I don't believe "we'll make more money this way!" is an excuse for poor treatment of their customers.  Capitalism without ethics is sociopathic in its pursuit of money. 

 

The same argument can be made about, say, Skyrim and availability of mods for PC players, which significantly prolonged the lifespan of the game and made it way more fun, despite the fact that the title sold like fresh buns on consoles. Yet, it happens.

 

 

The existence of mods for PC but not consoles was a longstanding, well-known functional difference between platforms.  No one buying the game on console would have expected mods to be available.  No one would have bought the game on console with the reasonable expectation of mods only to find that they were not available.  It is not a comparable situation because the key point here is that something changed. 

 

Also - you're arguing that next-gen players mattering more is selfish, yet asking them to support dying consoles despite no financial benefits and holding back the experience for everyone isn't equally selfish?

 

 

No, because if we're talking about BioWare, no one forced them to support old gen for the initial release.  They chose to.  If we're talking about next gen players, they weren't promised a "true next gen experience" with DAI.  They bought the game knowing full well it was a cross-platform title. 

 

You keep trying to treat this as a broad discussion of ageing technology and the phasing out of last gen hardware generally. 

 

It's not.  It's very specific. 

 

It's about BioWare's decision to release this game on last gen and then drop support for it without warning or explanation.  It's about the parameters of the product changing before the product has been completely released. 

 

The idea that the base game and the DLC are completely separate products may be legally sound, but - particularly with heavily narrative games - we all know that is not how it works in practical terms.  Defining them as separate products and suggesting that there is should be no reasonable expectation of access, is definitely a letter over spirit situation.

[Iakus]

Between this and the MP props, I wonder if they're trying to p*ss off more players than ME3 did.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

I'm sorry for the old console players. Hopefully this makes the new DLC better as a result.

 

If it does then it's a deal that this Xbox 360 and PS3 owner will happily make. I would have gladly accepted DA:I as a current gen console game if it that would have make the game better overall. 

[BansheeOwnage]

Now you're just ignoring bits of my post in favour of being angry and snarky. It isn't fair on people like me who spend a lot of money and time on new systems (2 years saving up for hardware, plus all the time it took me to learn how to build the thing), to then be told 'no, you may not have content that does your time and money justice, because some other people can't play it'. It's not 'fairness to everyone' taking the ball and going home because a couple of players have twisted their ankle.

Actually, I could argue that it's completely fair. DA:I is just one game, and one game that only ever said it would have (almost) the same features across all platforms before launch. Your argument is only valid if for some reason every new game ever was scaling down.

 

'no, you may not have content that does your time and money justice, because some other people can't play it' is basically exactly what they've said up until now for DA:I. It's not like Battlefield where newgen actually has more features. You're essentially paying for better graphics. Which is fine, but you shouldn't have expected more.

 

Think about it from a different perspective. If they released a couple more DLCs like JoH (in other words, scaled so all platforms could play them) no one would complain about oldgen holding them back, because no one would know! They'd just think "I guess this is what Bioware wants to make." They might complain about the content, just like JoH, but no one that I saw complained that JoH was the fault of the oldgen. Nobody.

[Hellion Rex]

Between this and the MP props, I wonder if they're trying to p*ss off more players than ME3 did.

Oh for God's sake. The two situations aren't even remotely comparable.

[AresKeith]

'no, you may not have content that does your time and money justice, because some other people can't play it' is basically exactly what they've said up until now for DA:I. It's not like Battlefield where newgen actually has more features. You're essentially paying for better graphics. Which is fine, but you shouldn't have expected more.

 

That's actually not entirely true, we already know certain things go cut or held back from the base game which could be traced back to last-gen not being able to handle it

[AresKeith]

Or simply traced back to BioWare not being able to handle it.

 

Obviously they could since the Crestwood alpha demo shows this

[Panda]

Oh for God's sake. The two situations aren't even remotely comparable.

 

Fandom disagreeing with devs about ending of the game compared to devs making story, multiplayer and aesthetic content unavailable to some customers out of blue while wanting them to buy another version of same game?

 

Yea I guess they don't so that comparable to me.

[London]

Wrote this in another forum but leaving it here as well:

I have to wonder if BioWare / EA shut down last gen not only because last gen didn't sell enough in their opinion, but also to try to compete with Witcher 3 in DLC.

DA2 DLC tried to compensate for the critiques people had about the reused environment, and in the end helped them save face when the product was considered as a whole with the DLC. (I loved DA2 before DLC, but for some people the DLC saved it.)

DAI received a ton of praise, and critiques some of us had (me included) about boring side quests and other issues were drowned out by game of the year awards and positive word of mouth. Now that Witcher 3 came out and shows us the quality DAI could/should have had, many who previously sang DAIs praises have turned on it now that they see that games can be better than what we are used to getting. In face of the overwhelming praise Witcher 3 gets, they may need to use DLC to up the ante and show BioWare fans that they too still got it and can make more elaborate content. To do so, dropping last gen may be necessary if last gen can only handle like 15 people on the screen at once and only 7 that move around. (I have no idea what it can really handle, but I do believe DAIs world sacrificed to play in last gen). With Mass Effect coming, sales could be hurt if the last impression we have is DAI, much like ME3 could have lost sales if they made no effort to make DA2 better through DLC.

Still...it kind of sucks to offer a product and then stop supporting it on certain platforms less than a year later. I wish they just never offered it for last gen at all, rather than pulling a bait and switch.

[Dabrikishaw]

At the very least, I doubt EA/Bioware will repeat this incident when making games for the 9th gen consoles.

[AresKeith]

I believe Iakus was referring to "this"...being no last-gen support and the MP Skyhold kitch as possibly angering a vocal minority of the populace here...but nvm.

Look I own a 360, a PS3, a PS4, an XBox One and an Alienware Alpha, but that doesn't mean that what was done today wasn't morally grey, if not, outright wrong.

 

Morally Grey is the closest thing I would this, or necessary evil

[BansheeOwnage]

When the Director's Cut of Deus Ex: Human Revolution was released, I was able to pick it up for like five bucks because I owned a copy of the game as well as its "The Missing Link" DLC.  And that wasn't even a platform change.

 

I think that's the absolute least Bioware could do, given their forcing a bunch of their players to buy a new console.  

 

Free digital copy with a registered lastgen copy would be better.

This is feasible, at least on Xbox One. If they're going to release 360-only games via backwards compatibility for free if you own them, they should release cross-gen games for free if you own them. Honestly, this should be standard practice regardless of Bioware.

[midnight tea]

And as such I expect to have fewer games to choose from.  But if a game is made available to me, no, I don't expect to be treated as a second-class gamer in respect of that game when there was no price drop to recognise that it was an inferior product (and yes, capacity to upgrade in a base unit is usually taken into account when pricing things). 

 

Why would there be a price drop for the Inqusition itself? We all got the same product and experience up until that point, and won't be getting those DLCS for free, as I've already pointed out.

 

Uh, this is getting quite long...

 

Spoiler

I was talking about what would be honourable, not what would be the most profitable.  Unless your position is that supporting last gen would be financially disasterous to them (in which case, I believe the burden of proof would be on you), then I don't believe "we'll make more money this way!" is an excuse for poor treatment of their customers.  Capitalism without ethics is sociopathic in its pursuit of money. 

 

Considering that we don't yet have full information about the DLC or anything concerning the future of the game, you making claims about what's honorable or not for a company to do (or what they'll eventually do) is as much a matter of speculation as me making a guess that this is too much of a financial burden.

 

 

The existence of mods for PC but not consoles was a longstanding, well-known functional difference between platforms.  No one buying the game on console would have expected mods to be available.  No one would have bought the game on console with the reasonable expectation of mods only to find that they were not available.  It is not a comparable situation because the key point here is that something changed. 

 

The key point you missed here is the fact that buying something on a certain platform comes with its consequences, exactly because things change. This is also why I didn't bother to buy Inquisition on my own PS3, but decided instead to invest in a copy for my (dying at that time) PC. With the way new console began pushing old-gens away it was getting obvious that for a game of this scope I'd either get a short end of the stick, whether it comes to support from either Bioware, EA or Sony itself.

 

 

No, because if we're talking about BioWare, no one forced them to support old gen for the initial release.  They chose to.  If we're talking about next gen players, they weren't promised a "true next gen experience" with DAI.  They bought the game knowing full well it was a cross-platform title. 

 

You're right, it was their decision and their mistake. Just like it was a mistake for, say, Microsoft to invest in Kinect. We know such things happen - but even roughly knowing the realities of he market (especially gaming market) we - the old-gen console owners - should know that eventually the support will drop. I mean, for all we know, it might be even that Bioware had to drop old console versions of the DLC, because, for example, Sony scrapped a software update for Playstation 3, which would help run the DLC. We have no evidence of that, obviously, but at the same time we don't have any evidence that they didn't try to do something, only to have their hands tied by external pressure or circumstances.

 

You keep trying to treat this as a broad discussion of ageing technology and the phasing out of last gen hardware generally. 

 

It's not.  It's very specific. 

 

Yet this very specific example shows the reality of gaming market today. It's not any sort of issue that can be separated form it.

 

 

 

It's about BioWare's decision to release this game on last gen and then drop support for it without warning or explanation.  It's about the parameters of the product changing before the product has been completely released. 

 

The idea that the base game and the DLC are completely separate products may be legally sound, but - particularly with heavily narrative games - we all know that is not how it works in practical terms.  Defining them as separate products and suggesting that there is should be no reasonable expectation of access, is definitely a letter over spirit situation.

 

The DLC hasn't been released yet and for all we know, won't be released for a bit yet - so don't say it like they didn't drop it without warning, when the inclusion of this gamesave migration feature came with a warning. If anything, Bioware has yet time to clarify the situation - we're yet to see what they'll do.

[Iakus]

Oh for God's sake. The two situations aren't even remotely comparable.

They're comparable because it's dividing and p*ssing off the fans.  FOr different reasons, sure.  But the anger is still there.