514 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

DLC has become an integral part of video games in the last few years. Rightly or wrongly, a game is not seen as "complete" until all the DLC is released. For better or for worse, it's part of gaming culture now.

So by not selling all the DLC on a given platform, it is seen as not selling a complete game. If they had said right off the bat a given game like DAI or MEA) was going to be nextgen only, you at least know months/years in advance that a game will or will not be available to you. You are not out any money, as there was no product for you to buy to begin with. If you sell a game and suddenly drop DLC support a few months later you are left feeling like you bought an incomplete product.

While I understand the mentality is out there, I just don't understand the mentality. Which is what promoted my question.

I agree that it's right for people to feel done in by with the drop of future DLC for DAI. As I said, it's a perfectly reasonable expectation with the way the market is set up right now to expect that all DLC will be available on the platform you purchased the base game on (for consoles). I just don't see it the same as selling an incomplete product, because the "complete" product was the out-of-the-box one.

When we start thinking of DLC as being included into the "core" game, we're moving closer toward accepting the developer dream of software as a "service" where we can be made to pay repeatedly for the same essential product. That's why I prefer to say DLC is an add-on, sold separately and unrelated to the base game.

Ultimately, though, I don't see the difference between saying you're out of content if the first game in a series is, say, on PS1 and the second game is on PS2. The developers still dropped support. You need the second game to complete the story. So what makes it different?

[Father_Jerusalem]

And you know it's not just DLC, right?

 

It's support too. It's patches. It's fixing the bugs that exist in the game. We will never get fixes for those issues. Bioware has said so. 
 

"The team had to make the tough decision to end new content and patch support for older systems. This affects single-player and multiplayer DLC content, as well as patches."

 

Bioware simply doesn't give a **** about anyone who is playing on older consoles. If they had admitted that they don't give a **** about us from the start, I would have known that fact and worked harder to save up the money to get a new console. But to buy the game that was released on a platform I have, and then 8 months later be told "Hahahahahha **** you"?

 

That's some bullshit, and we all know it. It's truly disheartening to see so many of my fellow gamers turn viciously against the people being screwed over here. I hope that when Bioware inevitably screws you over, you understand the irony.

[Iakus]

While I understand the mentality is out there, I just don't understand the mentality. Which is what promoted my question.

I agree that it's right for people to feel done in by with the drop of future DLC for DAI. As I said, it's a perfectly reasonable expectation with the way the market is set up right now to expect that all DLC will be available on the platform you purchased the base game on (for consoles). I just don't see it the same as selling an incomplete product, because the "complete" product was the out-of-the-box one.

When we start thinking of DLC as being included into the "core" game, we're moving closer toward accepting the developer dream of software as a "service" where we can be made to pay repeatedly for the same essential product. That's why I prefer to say DLC is an add-on, sold separately and unrelated to the base game.

Ultimately, though, I don't see the difference between saying you're out of content if the first game in a series is, say, on PS1 and the second game is on PS2. The developers still dropped support. You need the second game to complete the story. So what makes it different?

THere was a time when that was true.  But not anymore.

 

Imagine if in ME2's time the 360 only received Overlord and not Lair of the Shadow Broker, Stolen Memories, or Arrival?

 

How about if only the PS3 got Legacy from DA2?  

 

What if ME3's CItadel was a PC exclusive?  Or From Ashes?

 

I imagine players would have been seriously p*ssed, because these are DLCs a lot of people see as important to the game.

[ashwind]

Ultimately, though, I don't see the difference between saying you're out of content if the first game in a series is, say, on PS1 and the second game is on PS2. The developers still dropped support. You need the second game to complete the story. So what makes it different?

 

The ultimate difference is that some customers will not feel that they are being treated unfairly. Lets forget about discounts, I would assume that the standard price for purchasing DA:I on 360/PS3/XB1/PS4/PC is the same, therefore everyone paid the same amount.

 

If Bioware releases DA:I 2 for PS4/XB1/PC and stop content and support for DA:I on all 5 platforms. It means that all of us will have to buy DA:I 2 to complete the story. Hence everyone got the same value for money. Fairness.

 

Now, owners of DA:I on 360/PS3 feels angry and rightly so because they are not being treated fairly. So yes, dropping lastgen is unethical no matter how you put it. I am on PC, I dont feel comfortable buying the story DLC that is suppose to complete my Inquisitor's story because it is unethical and selfish for supporting Bioware.

 

Well... there is always Let's Play.

 

[Edit]

Anything short of a free upgrade for lastgen owners is unacceptable in my books. Price cuts is just as unethical. It is not the money, it is the principle.

[Mornmagor]

I am going to answer this comment. 

 

If you are expecting the next to be insane compared to what is already out, then likely you will already be disappointed. The reason for this, is DLC is generally content change with a bit of code change (it used to be on last-gen that it had to be content only, because it was required your DLC ran on the shipped version of the game, not the patched version). While the industry works to move away from this I expect we can see different DLC but simply speaking that change will not be instantaneous. 

 

Regardless of that, you still have to consider something like PC, we have minspec requirements to consider. So you cant push the envelope that far.

 

Next ill state there is other things to consider, something like you have to tie your content into the exist game in some sense, not all DLC can be self contained. Take something like a new piece of armor, if that thing has a new VFX then you could be putting additional memory load on your already streached sections of the game, even though it is something introduced by the DLC. On a minspec PC if you run out of memory the game can start paging to the hard drive, you might get performance problems but the game wont crash. Do you think something like this exists for both last-gen systems?

 

I hate to be "that guy", but does this mean you're gonna add fancy new armor in the DLCs coming?

 

Other than that, i think it's pretty obvious, that trying to make this work on older consoles as well, was a stretch, they decided to do so at the beginning, now it's going to bite back at them if they continue.

 

Are people expected to feel angry about it? Probably, since this means for many, they will have to buy the game again, and even a new console, and for some people this is not something easy, especially for something like just a DLC.

 

Anyway, i think it would have been better if there was no support for the old consoles from the start, dropping it now is technically inevitable, but people are naturally going to feel bummed about it.

[Gold Dragon]

And what of Backwards compatibility?  Didn't that get announced at E3?  Should DA:I get added to that list, then all that is needed is buying a new system, right? (Granted, PS players will still be rightfully angry unless/until they get the same)

 

I'm not saying the anger & frustration are unwarranted, but.....

[Eelectrica]

And what of Backwards compatibility? Didn't that get announced at E3? Should DA:I get added to that list, then all that is needed is buying a new system, right? (Granted, PS players will still be rightfully angry unless/until they get the same)

I'm not saying the anger & frustration are unwarranted, but.....

I don't think backwards compatibility helps here as it is still the xb360 codebase. It won't accept xb-one patches and DLC.
Although if Bryan says otherwise, I will happily read and learn.

[Bryan Johnson]

And what of Backwards compatibility?  Didn't that get announced at E3?  Should DA:I get added to that list, then all that is needed is buying a new system, right? (Granted, PS players will still be rightfully angry unless/until they get the same)

 

I'm not saying the anger & frustration are unwarranted, but.....

 

 

I don't think backwards compatibility helps here as it is still the xb360 codebase. It won't accept xb-one patches and DLC.
Although if Bryan says otherwise, I will happily read and learn.

From the releases I have seen Xb1 backwards compatability does not allow for (currently) 1. Installed discs (which Disc 1 is for DAI) 2. DLC 3. Multi-disk (which is also DAI)

[Artemis_Entrari]

Did BioWare indicate before DAI was released that it wouldn't support future DLC for the older consoles?  If not, then it's a shitty move. 

[Savber100]

Why is it unethical? 

You paid the full price of a complete game. The studio never promised that DLC content will be multi-platform. 

If the additional feature can only work in different hardware then missing out isn't sensible. 

It's like saying that since my Mac can't run Window games, therefore Microsoft is immoral for doing so. 

 

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

Why is it unethical? 

You paid the full price of a complete game. The studio never promised that DLC content will be multi-platform. 

If the additional feature can only work in different hardware then missing out isn't sensible. 

It's like saying that since my Mac can't run Window games, therefore Microsoft is immoral for doing so. 

 

 

But, as I stated earlier, macs can run Windows games. I have DA2 installed on both. I only paid once for the game. Imagine that!

[GreatBlueHeron]

Did BioWare indicate before DAI was released that it wouldn't support future DLC for the older consoles? If not, then it's a shitty move.

Nope. It was announced at e3 before dai was released that Xbox one would receive timed exclusive content. They could announce that, but couldn't announce exclusive permanent content for ps4, Xbox one and PC for some strange reason.

[Narcosynthesis]

Nope. It was announced at e3 before dai was released that Xbox one would receive timed exclusive content. They could announce that, but couldn't announce exclusive permanent content for ps4, Xbox one and PC for some strange reason.

 

Which raises the question of whether dropping the old generation really was something that they had actually planned beforehand or something which came afterwards. Don't want to be too apologetic here, but on the other hand I don't want to fall into the other extreme by suspecting a long-term evil masterplan to rip off old-gen users. 

 

The timed exclusive content is something that was well-defined beforehand, it's very nature being something to be used to promote a certain console - thus the announcement. That was known from the beginning and fixated via contracts and all.

 

Dropping support for 360 and PS3, however, is something that could just as easily be the result of an evaluation post-release or even post-JoH where they weighted the potential benefits of sticking with five platforms for all future stuff against the costs/effort - with the result that they came to the conclusion that it's just not practical/worth the effort.

 

That doesn't change the point that it is a pretty unfortunate decision (to say the least...), of course, but just assuming that it was the plan from the very beginning is, at this point, nothing more but speculation and baseless accusation. 

[correctamundo]

But, as I stated earlier, macs can run Windows games. I have DA2 installed on both. I only paid once for the game. Imagine that!

 

But can you play them both at the same time?

[Iakus]

 

Dropping support for 360 and PS3, however, is something that could just as easily be the result of an evaluation post-release or even post-JoH where they weighted the potential benefits of sticking with five platforms for all future stuff against the costs/effort - with the result that they came to the conclusion that it's just not practical/worth the effort.

 

That doesn't change the point that it is a pretty unfortunate decision (to say the least...), of course, but just assuming that it was the plan from the very beginning is, at this point, nothing more but speculation and baseless accusation. 

This may well be true.  HEck, it's quite likely.

 

But the lack of official explanation or apology, and only a token gesture towards those affected (the save import) is, let's face it, pretty terrible customer service.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

But can you play them both at the same time?

 

Yes

[Narcosynthesis]

This may well be true.  HEck, it's quite likely.

 

But the lack of official explanation or apology, and only a token gesture towards those affected (the save import) is, let's face it, pretty terrible customer service.

 

Agreed. My hope for the people on old-gen still is that something like that and/or an announcement of special offers for those affected will follow with the official announcement of the DLC, but as things are right now I agree that it certainly lacks.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

The whole 'but I have to buy a second copy of the game' thing is the fault of MS and Sony, not EA. Plainly EA/Origin is perfectly willing to allow you to download the game on multiple platforms.

[thesuperdarkone2]

Why is it unethical? 

You paid the full price of a complete game. The studio never promised that DLC content will be multi-platform. 

If the additional feature can only work in different hardware then missing out isn't sensible. 

It's like saying that since my Mac can't run Window games, therefore Microsoft is immoral for doing so. 

 

Did you say the same thing when central European players couldn't get LotSB?

[duckley]

Unfortunate yes - unethical (IMO) no.

[Avejajed]

And you know it's not just DLC, right?

 

It's support too. It's patches. It's fixing the bugs that exist in the game. We will never get fixes for those issues. Bioware has said so. 
 

"The team had to make the tough decision to end new content and patch support for older systems. This affects single-player and multiplayer DLC content, as well as patches."

 

Bioware simply doesn't give a **** about anyone who is playing on older consoles. If they had admitted that they don't give a **** about us from the start, I would have known that fact and worked harder to save up the money to get a new console. But to buy the game that was released on a platform I have, and then 8 months later be told "Hahahahahha **** you"?

 

That's some bullshit, and we all know it. It's truly disheartening to see so many of my fellow gamers turn viciously against the people being screwed over here. I hope that when Bioware inevitably screws you over, you understand the irony.

 

Let's be honest. If there's still a bug in the game that's not fixed yet, it's not going to be, and it never was going to be. Those bugs aren't going to be fixed on newer consoles either. 

 

And if Bioware didn't care about it's older console players why the hell would they work so damn hard to make the game available to you? 

 

Maybe the conversation went like this.

 

Bioware Employee 1: "You know, f*** those old console players. They suuuuuuuuuuuuck. I don't even like them x1000."

Bioware Employee 2: "IKR! You know what we should do? We shouldn't even bother making this game for them."

Bioware Employee 1: "Noooooooooooo you know what would be even better? If we only made the base game for them and then cut them off after that hahahaha."

Bioware Employee 3: "Yeah, that's cool but you know that's going to take us like an extra year and a LOT of cut content and extra work just to offer them the base game?"

Bioware Employee 1: "Worth it."

[Father_Jerusalem]

Let's be honest. If there's still a bug in the game that's not fixed yet, it's not going to be, and it never was going to be. Those bugs aren't going to be fixed on newer consoles either. 

 

And if Bioware didn't care about it's older console players why the hell would they work so damn hard to make the game available to you? 

 

Maybe the conversation went like this.

 

Bioware Employee 1: "You know, f*** those old console players. They suuuuuuuuuuuuck. I don't even like them x1000."

Bioware Employee 2: "IKR! You know what we should do? We shouldn't even bother making this game for them."

Bioware Employee 1: "Noooooooooooo you know what would be even better? If we only made the base game for them and then cut them off after that hahahaha."

Bioware Employee 3: "Yeah, that's cool but you know that's going to take us like an extra year and a LOT of cut content and extra work just to offer them the base game?"

Bioware Employee 1: "Worth it."

 

Because they wanted my money. And now they've decided that they no longer want my money, so I plan on obliging Bioware in their efforts to not earn my money anymore.

 

And I'm honestly curious as to what YOUR thought process is, given that this issue doesn't concern you one whit?

 

Is it something like: "OMGZ PPL ARE SAYING MEAN THINGS ABOUT BIOWAREZ QUICK IF I RUN IN TO MAKE FUN OF THEM AND CALL THEM IDIOTS MAYBE BIOWAREZ WILL GIVE ME $1 OFF MY NEXT DLC PURCHASE OMGZ!"

 

Because... you know they're not going to, right?

[GreatBlueHeron]

Which raises the question of whether dropping the old generation really was something that they had actually planned beforehand or something which came afterwards. Don't want to be too apologetic here, but on the other hand I don't want to fall into the other extreme by suspecting a long-term evil masterplan to rip off old-gen users.

The timed exclusive content is something that was well-defined beforehand, it's very nature being something to be used to promote a certain console - thus the announcement. That was known from the beginning and fixated via contracts and all.

Dropping support for 360 and PS3, however, is something that could just as easily be the result of an evaluation post-release or even post-JoH where they weighted the potential benefits of sticking with five platforms for all future stuff against the costs/effort - with the result that they came to the conclusion that it's just not practical/worth the effort.

That doesn't change the point that it is a pretty unfortunate decision (to say the least...), of course, but just assuming that it was the plan from the very beginning is, at this point, nothing more but speculation and baseless accusation.

Sure, could be. These kinds of decisions are not made at the drop of a hat, though. The game was delayed for a year so they knew the limitations they were working with. It was likely put on the table to drop support or even planned for a specific date at that time, we'll never know. I think it's quite likely they wanted those extra Xbox 360 and ps3 monies. Telling us we may not get the full package would have hurt sales.

[Narcosynthesis]

Sure, could be. These kinds of decisions are not made at the drop of a hat, though. The game was delayed for a year so they knew the limitations they were working with. It was likely put on the table to drop support or even planned for a specific date at that time, we'll never know. I think it's quite likely they wanted those extra Xbox 360 and ps3 monies. Telling us we may not get the full package would have hurt sales.

 

That they wanted the 360 and PS3 money is definitely something we can agree on. I mean, they didn't go the extra mile with these platforms just out of fun or good will, I have no illusions about that - in the end it all comes down to profit. 

 

The rest, however, is your speculation, which is as good as mine at this point (like you said: we'll never know). While I agree that it's probably not something that happened from one day to the next, I have serious doubts that it was the plan from the beginning or even something they already new at E3 (as you suggested in the earlier post) because like I said: in the end it comes down to profit, so my guess is that they waited out the numbers of the sales, waited out how things turned out with JoH (and again: took a look at the sale numbers), waited whether any of this justified the extra effort and then at some point came to the conclusion that whatever they plan for the next DLC was too much effort (or, depending on what comes, just plain impossible) to do on the old platforms and dropped it. After all: If this had been the plan from the beginning, why even go the extra mile and make JoH for all platforms? Or announce the dropping a few weeks after Hakkon (when they had the sales in the sack) and be done with the angry reactions? Announcing it at the point where the next DLC or at least its announcement is with relative certainty close at hand just doesn't make much sense from a business or marketing perspective if it had been planned for a long time.

[Avejajed]

Because they wanted my money. And now they've decided that they no longer want my money, so I plan on obliging Bioware in their efforts to not earn my money anymore.

And I'm honestly curious as to what YOUR thought process is, given that this issue doesn't concern you one whit?

Is it something like: "OMGZ PPL ARE SAYING MEAN THINGS ABOUT BIOWAREZ QUICK IF I RUN IN TO MAKE FUN OF THEM AND CALL THEM IDIOTS MAYBE BIOWAREZ WILL GIVE ME $1 OFF MY NEXT DLC PURCHASE OMGZ!"

Because... you know they're not going to, right?

I'm not the one begging for a free or discounted game and complaining that they are trying to screw me out of money. I can afford to buy one twice. Actually, after vacation in October we're going to buy an additional Xbox one so that we (my husband and I) don't have to fight over the one we have.

As for why I'm here, well, I'm allowed an opinion and I'm allowed to state it. You guys are wasting your breath.

Also, it's much to crass to go around calling people idiots.