80 réponses à ce sujet

[Dieb]

The same way...but without what is arguably one of Mass Effect's best characters.

 

I mean if you don't care, fine, but since the characters are the only real thing ME3 has going for it that's a pretty big loss for everyone that does (ie most people; Bioware fans don't seem to care much that Bioware is not the greatest at writing stories so long as they get to talk to interesting people).

 

Yes, but that is exactly what I was saying. It is supposed to be quality content.

 

I am not argueing for  Day-One-DLC, but it's here. Like factory processed meat or dubiously cheap fashion brand clothing. And selling a character  addtionally because of the very reasons you stated -though I also second Al Foley's slight defusal of their implications- is their way of playing ball.

 

We also can never be absolutely certain about the circumstances. The actual practice originally comes from a rather smart budgeting move, which is giving the devs something to do after a game cleared its alpha phase - level designers, character designers, cinematic designers. Big studios usually are at first inevitably overwhelmed, so they hire additional staff, and when the biggest chunks are done with & entered playtesting and general QA, these people are effectively redudant.

 

While we cannot know in this case (it is both possible to ommit all Javik parts altogether with ease, yet some of them do seem integral), it's a fact that in many others, D1 DLC is basically what the majority of devs do in the timeframe when the majority of the game is done until is going gold.

 

I'm speaking from a position of privilege of course, because I believe each and every single aspect of this hobby is vain per se, and honestly, 20 bucks don't mean the world to me. There's many other ways of spending your money in an equally moronic fashion, and they aren't frowned upon as much merely because they are physical objects.

[BobZilla84]

I wonder when we'll get some actual details about the Dlc we know last gen supposedly can't handle it or them so I wonder could we be getting an Expansion.I also thought that by using the Qunari Invasion Arc B-Ware could add the Keep Defense sections that they couldn't add because last gen couldn't handle it that would be interesting or maybe actual Battles with lots of enemies.

So all I want is alot of Story/Character Interactions so go heavy on those and not so much on the Exploration you need to find a balance but Story must take Priority over Exploration do that and alot of us fans will be happy so make it happen B-Ware.

[Heimdall]

I wonder when we'll get some actual details about the Dlc we know last gen supposedly can't handle it or them so I wonder could we be getting an Expansion.I also thought that by using the Qunari Invasion Arc B-Ware could add the Keep Defense sections that they couldn't add because last gen couldn't handle it that would be interesting or maybe actual Battles with lots of enemies.

So all I want is alot of Story/Character Interactions so go heavy on those and not so much on the Exploration you need to find a balance but Story must take Priority over Exploration do that and alot of us fans will be happy so make it happen B-Ware.

Laidlaw tweeted that creature density (The amount of enemies/characters that can appear on the screen before system memory commits seppuku) was a big reason for the decision to cut out old gen.

So I think bigger battles are something you can count on.

[AlanC9]

That's honestly their own fault. The fact they didn't think of it beforehand, and then decided to SELL the fix ("fix")  to their shitty writing just shows they didn't think about what they were doing. The game would have been much better if that DLC had been in the game from the beginning.

But long as you're fantasizing about an alternate ME3 which is that different from the one Bio actually wrote, why limit your fantasy to ME3 + Leviathan? Why not go all the way to a full rewrite? This seems like a very strange way to think about the issue.
 

Because it's a goddamn Prothean.

Yeah, I remember that. But so what? The whole point of ME1 was that the protheans, as a race, weren't very important. Some of their scientists did something useful, but their race itself was just another one in the long parade of Reaper victims.

[AlanC9]

While we cannot know in this case (it is both possible to ommit all Javik parts altogether with ease, yet some of them do seem integral), it's a fact that in many others, D1 DLC is basically what the majority of devs do in the timeframe when the majority of the game is done until is going gold.
 

Devs have said that companions cause a QA nightmare if you don't do them at the same time as the full game, so they prefer to do them at the same time.

Looking at the leaked ME3 script, it's not really clear what they were going to do for day 1 DLC. We know there was going to be something since that was established EA policy at the time.

[Il Divo]

Silly? Are you ****** kidding me? Leviathan should have been in there at release, how is that even debatable? The ending makes no sense anyway, but it makes even less sense without Leviathan. It's an integral part of the plot, the fact you have to pay more money just to plug a bunch of plot holes at the end is just extortion.

 

Javik always was supposed to be in the game, he was written beforehand. He is, after all, Day 1 DLC. Then they cut him out and sold him back because they KNEW people would pay 10 bucks if it meant speaking to a Prothean. They KNEW that. That's bullshit, cutting out interesting parts of your game and selling them back for more money.

 

I never understood this argument. "Don't make the interesting parts of your game" dlc is what it boils down to, in essence.

 

It only makes sense to create content that you think/hope your fans will pay for.

[Dean_the_Young]

I never understood this argument. "Don't make the interesting parts of your game" dlc is what it boils down to, in essence.

 

It only makes sense to create content that you think/hope your fans will pay for.

 

It's simple, Divo.

 

 

Boring stuff can be pulled out and sold as DLC to the people who find it interesting.

 

But anything I find interesting should be in the game from the start.

[Il Divo]

It's simple, Divo.

 

 

Boring stuff can be pulled out and sold as DLC to the people who find it interesting.

 

But anything I find interesting should be in the game from the start.

 

Sounds about right. Just so completely counter-intuitive. To me it's rather like saying that because Halo is most well known for its gameplay, anything that focuses on that should be completely free, but devs can charge all they want for story/character content.

[abisha]

the DLC from EA are extortion they charge 37% the cost of a new copy.

total nonsense.

 

http://www.mediafire...g/extortion.jpg

[unclee]

the DLC from EA are extortion they charge 37% the cost of a new copy.

total nonsense.

 

http://www.mediafire...g/extortion.jpg

 

Yes, let's compare the official store price to that of a grey market seller. That's rational.

 

Not saying the price for JoH isn't crazy high, but let's not pretend grey market sellers are suddenly legitimate comparisons (and no, I'm not hating on grey market sites. I've used them myself).

[Legion of 1337]

But long as you're fantasizing about an alternate ME3 which is that different from the one Bio actually wrote, why limit your fantasy to ME3 + Leviathan? Why not go all the way to a full rewrite? This seems like a very strange way to think about the issue.


Yeah, I remember that. But so what? The whole point of ME1 was that the protheans, as a race, weren't very important. Some of their scientists did something useful, but their race itself was just another one in the long parade of Reaper victims.

I would have loved it if ME3 had a completely diffferent plot, but there was no way that was going to happen. The least they could have done is present what they did do ib the way that makes it look the least bad.

[Legion of 1337]

I never understood this argument. "Don't make the interesting parts of your game" dlc is what it boils down to, in essence.

It only makes sense to create content that you think/hope your fans will pay for.

So, charge me 60 bucks for mostly crap sinply to allow me to spend another 10 bucks on a bit that is actually great? Youre arguing this isnt a blatant cash grab?

[Il Divo]

So, charge me 60 bucks for mostly crap sinply to allow me to spend another 10 bucks on a bit that is actually great? Youre arguing this isnt a blatant cash grab?

 

That's ultimately your problem, not the developers. They're not required to not give away Javik merely because a player enjoyed or did not enjoy the main campaign.

 

You actually demonstrate the issue quite clearly: "Charge me $60" as if it's an affront. When was the last time gaming prices actually increased, barring some special editions? Dlc offers an optional method of recouping that cost, since gamers seem entirely hostile to any increased price points. So if we want to talk cash grab, we could also discuss the role that entitlement plays amongst gamers.  

[Lyralei]

Huh. Not sure how I feel about that if it's true. I kinda figured they had to kill of the Inquisitor (or at least get rid of them) somehow or it wouldn't make sense to continue on with someone else in the future.. Not sure I like it though...

[AlanC9]

I would have loved it if ME3 had a completely diffferent plot, but there was no way that was going to happen. The least they could have done is present what they did do ib the way that makes it look the least bad.

But that's the exact issue; Leviathan wasn't what they did. As far back as the leaked script and the Dark Energy plot, the plan was to tease the Reaper mystery and only reveal answers at the very end. You're asking for a conceptual revision of the entire approach to the plot, and then limiting the consequences of that revision for no good reason.

Edit: ME3 particulars aside, the point is that you need to work from the general vision for the game to determine what can be DLC and what can't.

[AlanC9]

So, charge me 60 bucks for mostly crap sinply to allow me to spend another 10 bucks on a bit that is actually great? Youre arguing this isnt a blatant cash grab?

Even assuming that both those things are true, you're saying that Bio knew those things in advance?

[mkess]

... fix it till it is.

I thought. this is the Squeenix Motto.

[mkess]

That's ultimately your problem, not the developers. They're not required to not give away Javik merely because a player enjoyed or did not enjoy the main campaign.

 

You actually demonstrate the issue quite clearly: "Charge me $60" as if it's an affront. When was the last time gaming prices actually increased, barring some special editions? Dlc offers an optional method of recouping that cost, since gamers seem entirely hostile to any increased price points. So if we want to talk cash grab, we could also discuss the role that entitlement plays amongst gamers.  

 

Yes look how good it will work for destiny, and the next expansion, trying to squeeze another full price out of their now very pissed of fanbase. ... Or look at Evolve, who devolved DLC further beyond reason, in their new money grabbing scheme...

 

I am one of the older players, who had learned one thing over time: Waiting and patience.

 

I buy games only after they are complete. With only one or two exceptions. I still wait for a complete edition of DA II and Masseffect 2/3 but I think we will never ever see this, because EA and Bioware is far too greedy and stubborn for their own good.

 

Funny thing is, the main story gets more and more holes, for people who did not buy he DLC. Until they aren't interestest any longer in a new game at all. But go on, do as you please.

 

Every reference on DLC you make in the next games on DLC of past games in a serie will make gamers angry. Believe me, I felt anger in DA:I.

[Il Divo]

Yes look how good it will work for destiny, and the next expansion, trying to squeeze another full price out of their now very pissed of fanbase. ... Or look at Evolve, who devolved DLC further beyond reason, in their new money grabbing scheme...

 

I am one of the older players, who had learned one thing over time: Waiting and patience.

 

I buy games only after they are complete. With only one or two exceptions. I still wait for a complete edition of DA II and Masseffect 2/3 but I think we will never ever see this, because EA and Bioware is far too greedy and stubborn for their own good.

 

Funny thing is, the main story gets more and more holes, for people who did not buy he DLC. Until they aren't interestest any longer in a new game at all. But go on, do as you please.

 

Every reference on DLC you make in the next games on DLC of past games in a serie will make gamers angry. Believe me, I felt anger in DA:I.

 

Will make some gamers angrier. I seem to recall another sect that was pretty pissed off about Bioware's ME1 fake-out where they told us we'd be getting bridging dlc to Mass Effect 2. Or Dragon Age: Origins, which promised 2 years worth of downloadable as I recall, but was later cut down to less than a year. Point being: dlc hasn't killed Bioware so far and it's been going on for quite a while. I doubt a day of reckoning is in the works.

 

The whole "greedy corporations" line is cute, but doesn't tell the whole story. Yes, businesses are out to make money, that is their function at core. On the other end of the spectrum, gamers can also be an entitled bunch who want everything handed to them at a silver platter. And when it's not, they come foaming at the mouth crazy. Javik was pretty useless to the ME3 plot, in my opinion. The demand for free content amounts to "Because I want it".
 

[Il Divo]

Even assuming that both those things are true, you're saying that Bio knew those things in advance?

 

That's ultimately the other issue: regardless of my own personal hatred of the ME3 ending, I'm not sure how a game developer is supposed to predict every fan's response to a certain product. Should Javik have been pre-emptively made free before anyone had any idea of ME3's reception?

[Legion of 1337]

That's ultimately the other issue: regardless of my own personal hatred of the ME3 ending, I'm not sure how a game developer is supposed to predict every fan's response to a certain product. Should Javik have been pre-emptively made free before anyone had any idea of ME3's reception?

If they honestly thought that was a good ending before everyone told them otherwise, then theyre completely incompetent and deserve all the **** they get anyway.

[Il Divo]

If they honestly thought that was a good ending before everyone told them otherwise, then theyre completely incompetent and deserve all the **** they get anyway.

 

Maybe so. I personally despise the ending. There's nothing inherently wrong with making displeasure known to the developers. On the other end of the spectrum, hindsight is 20/20 and a product which a consumer dislikes does not behold the developer to giving them free content. 

 

Sure, that's a tactic that might mitigate some backlash. But that's ultimately up to each developer on how they handle the issue.  

[Linkenski]

Wow, as if it couldn't get any more contrived. That whole premise for the DLC sounds like Mass Effect 3 Cerberus garbage.

[Nube7]

Well changing the topic, sort of. Bioware just released this little bit of Deep Roads Lore on their social media. Which is hopefully a precursor to a real announcement, at least it's a nod that it will be about the deep roads.  I personally look forward to it, if it's story based. 

 

My two cents on the subject of DLC being good or bad. It's both. I love the idea of being able to see more of my favorite characters, see what other ideas developers liked to get into the game but weren't able to, and ultimately it's my choice whether I want to spend more money on a franchise, if the game is originally bad or lacking I will probably not (thinking of titan fall, that came out with like four maps and no real campaign).

 

The idea that it is a money grabbing scheme is part of the usual consumer based cynicism, which is not without due by any means, companies will always try to take advantage of it and try to profit from their properties as much as possible. But just like there are bad intentions, there are also good intentions. The other side of it is that it continues to give more steady jobs to people in an industry plagued with  lack of job security. It lets developers explore ideas that they weren't able to because of the realities of said industry. AAA titles are multi-million dollar ventures, the bigger you make it the higher the risks. If DAI had been as big as Bioware had wanted to make it and it flopped, or didn't make as much money as they expected, hundreds of people would be out of work. DLC helps mitigate that to an extent.

 

Overall its just a matter of  balance in my opinion, and companies are starting to realize that consumers will not pay up if the original content isn't up to par.

[LinksOcarina]

That's ultimately your problem, not the developers. They're not required to not give away Javik merely because a player enjoyed or did not enjoy the main campaign.

 

You actually demonstrate the issue quite clearly: "Charge me $60" as if it's an affront. When was the last time gaming prices actually increased, barring some special editions? Dlc offers an optional method of recouping that cost, since gamers seem entirely hostile to any increased price points. So if we want to talk cash grab, we could also discuss the role that entitlement plays amongst gamers.  

 

2005, actually. Prices have been kept down mostly DUE to the advent of downloadable content and sales helping deflect costs in the long run. 

 

Without that DLC, most games would probably be in the range of $70 to $80 by this generation to keep up with development costs, which keep rising. Interestingly enough, a lot of companies have begun to cut expenses over time, advertising budgets and licencing engines in favor of in-house engines, for example.

 

A lot of the way we see business today is done because of rising costs and keeping prices lower. That is actually benefiting consumers in some countries, where prices have been comparable. Other places, like Australia or Brazil, suffer still for games hitting sometimes $100 US. 

 

Most of us have no right to complain about prices in that perspective. 

 

As for DLC itself, what is good and what is not good is individually based, not something that is actually objective to actual quality.