Or kickstarted it. Publishers are not the be-all and end-all; times have changed (especially on PC).
But yes, prepare to be gouged for dlc.
It really depends on the content for me. It's pretty much guaranteed that I'll buy any story-based DLCs. I'm a sucker for them, even if they aren't great. I'm less likely to buy things like item pack and appearance packs. Those will really only pique my interest if they have things that I actually want. Most of the time, I'll buy them since they tend to be cheap. But I've passed on a few that seemed like duds.
Exactly I tend to buy all those ones at least. Generally I'm a single player gyu so I do tend to ge tanything that enhances the dstory even if it is a kind of run and gun affair like Omega was. I admit it's not the best DLC but I still found it fun. My favourite ME DLC is the Shadow Broker one. Anything single player related I'll likely get but the multiplayer stuff I'll leave well alone as I don't play those modes anyway.
Well, we all know for 100% EA[...]
Do we?
I bought most of the DLC for ME 1,2,3 and would have to say in general it was exceptable, like most people Pinnacle station and Hammerhead DLC were pretty oridnary and nowhere near the quality of the last few DLC.
To answer your question, yes.., and hope that its worth buying.
Cheers
Release the game in full as it was intended to be, then work on DLC to add new missions/ content to the experience. That's the approach I want them to take but honestly doubt they will.
I won't pretend I didn't buy every single piece of ME DLC regardless, but I don't want to feel like I've paid for something that should've been in the game in the first place. (I got Javik with the CE for 3 so I didn't feel too burnt.)
Eh the only DLC I felt really should've been there since the beginning, other than From Ashes, is Omega. There's Leviathan, but certain dialogue in the game makes it feel tacked on, specifically when Shepard is talking to Vendetta on Thessia and there's no mention of the "intelligence" even if you completed the DLC before then.
That's because Leviathan WAS tacked on. It was not planned DLC. It was "Oh sh*t we need to justify that starbrat because we explained it in the EC" DLC.
Eh the only DLC I felt really should've been there since the beginning, other than From Ashes, is Omega. There's Leviathan, but certain dialogue in the game makes it feel tacked on, specifically when Shepard is talking to Vendetta on Thessia and there's no mention of the "intelligence" even if you completed the DLC before then.
I would say Leviathan should've been part of the main game. It would be nice talking to the catalyst as it changes to a different person like Leviathan does in the dlc
Don't know what Vendetta would've said to Shepard when the intelligence is mentioned
I would say Leviathan should've been part of the main game. It would be nice talking to the catalyst as it changes to a different person like Leviathan does in the dlc
Don't know what Vendetta would've said to Shepard when the intelligence is mentioned
agreed seeing as the Protheans never actually finished building the Crucible themselves they wouldn't have come face to face with the intelligence like Shepard did. After all that Star brat as people call him is technically the intelligence.
I always see the whole "DLC was just cut content that they sold back to us" argument or similar things... Do you guys really think that if it wasn'r Paid DLC they would include it? Most of the Witcher "free" DLC is minor things that really effect nothing (and in my mind was only made free as a PR move). The VG industry is a just that, an industry and as an industry they need to make money. in the past Cut Content was Cut Content but now it has the chance to be revived as DLC. Like the HK-50 factory thing from KOTOR2, that was cut from the game, sure there are some modders that pieced the unfinished content back together and made it semi-playable but in the end it wasn't "true" content. nowadays that kind of thing can be made available later as DLC. also side note, I think that DLC's and Micro Transactions help keep the price of the games themselves down. Otherwise I wouldn't still be buying games for $60, it would be like $80-$100 for one game.
Yeah funny how pc games aren't that price isn't it.
can we not make this a PC vs console thing? the fact doesn't change that without DLC and other similar items, games would be a significantly higher price than they are now. The only reason Digital copies of the games often sell for less is because than there are less middle men (factories, shipping companies, stores etc.). DLC, downloadable expansions (that are for what ever reason not considered DLC), Micro-transactions... they all result in more money for the game makers/producers. now If they just went ahead and put that content into the vanilla game for whatever reason, than they would just have to cut something else. Why? because budgets don't grow on trees and in any market whatsoever the product you sell has to have a significant return or at least enough of a return to make investors happy enough to keep endorsing the future of the product.
I like to spend money so yes, no matter what crap they'll pull - and they will - I'll buy every single DLC.
<<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>
You must be either rich or poor... 
can we not make this a PC vs console thing? the fact doesn't change that without DLC and other similar items, games would be a significantly higher price than they are now. The only reason Digital copies of the games often sell for less is because than there are less middle men (factories, shipping companies, stores etc.).
<<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>
I Bolded and Italicised the above.
Interesting that my game on physical media cost me the same as that advertised in Origins = full price.
Can you post a link to an article that mentions no DLC = Higher game prices? I'd be interedted in reading it.... thanks
<<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>
I Bolded and Italicised the above.
Interesting that my game on physical media cost me the same as that advertised in Origins = full price.
Can you post a link to an article that mentions no DLC = Higher game prices? I'd be interedted in reading it.... thanks
I wouldn't bother with shills. Anyone with a sense of logic can disassemble his entire post of rubbish.
My experience of DLC from BW is that to get the full 'experience' on offer, you need the character/story DLCs if they continue with the idea of carrying over the same character across the titles. Without Zaeed, Kasumi, LOTSB, Arrival, Leviathan, Overlord, there's so much future content lost - meeting Zaeed in ME3 without having gotten to know him in ME2 would be empty. I know. As an example, I played ME2 before ME1 (yea, yea, I know) - encountering a talking geth, no impact. Arch Angel, oh some turian. Tali? And so on. Slightly different to DLCs there but the comparisons are the same.
If I enjoy the base game, I will certainly buy the deeper DLC.
What about From Ashes? Day one DLC with rather essential content that has most of its files already in vanilla game? Or Dead Space 3 and its "you've played the game, now buy the ending"? Those definitely feel like content cut on purpose.I always see the whole "DLC was just cut content that they sold back to us" argument or similar things... Do you guys really think that if it wasn'r Paid DLC they would include it? Most of the Witcher "free" DLC is minor things that really effect nothing (and in my mind was only made free as a PR move). The VG industry is a just that, an industry and as an industry they need to make money. in the past Cut Content was Cut Content but now it has the chance to be revived as DLC. Like the HK-50 factory thing from KOTOR2, that was cut from the game, sure there are some modders that pieced the unfinished content back together and made it semi-playable but in the end it wasn't "true" content. nowadays that kind of thing can be made available later as DLC. also side note, I think that DLC's and Micro Transactions help keep the price of the games themselves down. Otherwise I wouldn't still be buying games for $60, it would be like $80-$100 for one game.
ME series (mostly) had great DLC, every DLC in ME3 was amazing (aside From Ashes which was actually part of the main game) so I am in. That being said I won't buy alternative packs, weapon packs, skins and other utterly useless bs. I hope there won't be "companion" based DLC like Kasumi or Zaeed either.
Javik.What was essential about From Ashes?
I hope there won't be "companion" based DLC like Kasumi or Zaeed either.
Bioware said last year that there won't be any companion or "Day 1"-DLCs in future games.
Javik.
DLC companions in ME2 had their own stories that had nothing to do with main plot and next to no feedback on what you did or was about to do. Javik can be considered as a part of main plot, being last Prothean alive and all, and has unique perspective on everything. Overall he feels like cut out rather than added.
Sadly, yes... Unfortunately, most games cut out content then release it as DLC.
Javik.
DLC companions in ME2 had their own stories that had nothing to do with main plot and next to no feedback on what you did or was about to do. Javik can be considered as a part of main plot, being last Prothean alive and all, and has unique perspective on everything. Overall he feels like cut out rather than added.
See but how do you know that if Javik wasn't DLC that they wouldn't have just cut him? they might have almost finished him then been like we have to make decision between Javik and something else and went with the other thing. than they realized that if they make it a DLC they can get the extra budget to finish Javik.
Retour en haut