51 réponses à ce sujet

[xPez]

Probably has to do with how far out post launch they think DLC are viable. Skyrim was blockbuster and they only had two proper DLC and glorified housing mod all with in a year give or take. 

 

This.

 

How many big games these days get 5 proper DLCs?

[Killroy]

For them or for the industry?

For them. Numerous DA devs have said that Awakening-style and Awakening-length expansions aren't going to happen again.

[Majestic Jazz]

For them. Numerous DA devs have said that Awakening-style and Awakening-length expansions aren't going to happen again.

Ok cause I was about to say that other devs still do expansions and it works out well for them.

Think Ballad of Gay Tony for GTA4 or Undead Nightmare for Red Dead Redemption.

Expansions are still profitable, but either EA or Bioware just wants to stick with the overpriced smaller DLC model.

Also not to mention the 20-hour expansion for TW3 coming next spring.

[AshenEndymion]

When was the last time Bioware did 5 story DLCs

 

Dragon Age Origins?

 

Depending on how one wants to define "story DLC" you could probably say ME2 had five as well, but I think you'd have to stretch the definition...

[LaughingWolf]

Ok cause I was about to say that other devs still do expansions and it works out well for them.

Think Ballad of Gay Tony for GTA4 or Undead Nightmare for Red Dead Redemption.

Expansions are still profitable, but either EA or Bioware just wants to stick with the overpriced smaller DLC model.

Also not to mention the 20-hour expansion for TW3 coming next spring.

 

Ballad of Gay Tony and Undead Nightmare are over 5 years old. Awakening-sized expansions aren't that profitable anymore and are extremely rarely done. That's why Witcher 3 having 2 expansions is such a big deal, because no one really does that anymore.

[Shevy]

Ok cause I was about to say that other devs still do expansions and it works out well for them.

Think Ballad of Gay Tony for GTA4 or Undead Nightmare for Red Dead Redemption.

Expansions are still profitable, but either EA or Bioware just wants to stick with the overpriced smaller DLC model.

Also not to mention the 20-hour expansion for TW3 coming next spring.

BioWare isn't Rockstar and DA isn't GTA, not even Red Dead.

Additionally, they were released 5 years ago.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Three over about a year is about what I would expect, based on their previous games.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Ballad of Gay Tony and Undead Nightmare are over 5 years old. Awakening-sized expansions aren't that profitable anymore and are extremely rarely done. That's why Witcher 3 having 2 expansions is such a big deal, because no one really does that anymore.

 

It's not even 2 expansions. Going by them, it's one 10 hour pack (which is on par with Jaws of Hakkon, give or take) and a 20 hour one (which is either a small expansion or a big, Citadel-esque DLC). 

 

I'm also always amused that people take it as fact. Might, you know, wait for these addons to be released before using them as a comparison point.

[LaughingWolf]

It's not even 2 expansions. Going by them, it's one 10 hour pack (which is on par with Jaws of Hakkon, give or take) and a 20 hour one (which is either a small expansion or a big, Citadel-esque DLC). 

 

I'm also always amused that people take it as fact. Might, you know, wait for these addons to be released before using them as a comparison point.

 

Are they? I played and love Witcher 3, but I haven't been following the DLC info. If that's the size of them, then there hardly expansions. Or they are, and Bioware just labels expansions as DLC now? I mean, technically aren't expansions DLC anyways?

[AresKeith]

Are they? I played and love Witcher 3, but I haven't been following the DLC info. If that's the size of them, then there hardly expansions. Or they are, and Bioware just labels expansions as DLC now? I mean, technically aren't expansions DLC anyways?

 

They are, people basically separate them by the size of them

 

Back then expansions were literally separate games too lol

[AshenEndymion]

Are they? I played and love Witcher 3, but I haven't been following the DLC info. If that's the size of them, then there hardly expansions. Or they are, and Bioware just labels expansions as DLC now? I mean, technically aren't expansions DLC anyways?

 

That's the time-length CDProjektRed has used...  Keep in mind that they also said the base game was only 40 hours long...

 

And expansions can be considered DLC because they can be downloaded, rather than sold as a physical disc... But if we want to use that as the sole basis, then most games being sold nowadays should be considered DLC...  Because you don't necessarily need a physical disc to install/play them...

[Artemis_Entrari]

Expansions, I expect would take a lot more time to create then a DLC. These DLC look like they are made to sate the Dragon Age want while they are making the next part. 

How fast do you expect an expansion to be made anyway? >.>

 

The Witcher 3 has two planned expansions.  One is due in October, the second one (the longer one) is due early 2016.  The core game was released in May this year.

 

So if CDPR can accomplish two expansions within a calendar year of the release of the core game, I don't know why it's too much to expect BioWare to come up with *one* expansion during the lifetime of DA:I.

[Sunnie]

Because they made the decision to NOT make any more "expansions", favoring shorter cycle and easier to market DLC. EA Execs had a very heavy influence in that decision, because it costs a ton of $ to do large stand alone expansions.

[Rawgrim]

Several DLCs make more money than large expansion packs. It's that simple, really.

[xPez]

The Witcher 3 has two planned expansions.  One is due in October, the second one (the longer one) is due early 2016.  The core game was released in May this year.

 

So if CDPR can accomplish two expansions within a calendar year of the release of the core game, I don't know why it's too much to expect BioWare to come up with *one* expansion during the lifetime of DA:I.

 

I don't really like bringing up the Witcher 3 cause it causes chaos, but there isn't much difference between the two in terms of DLC.

 

The 16 pieces of free DLC for the TW3 are pretty much the same as the free add-ons to multiplayer that we've received so far; new weapons, skins, areas, enemies etc.

 

The two big expansions they have planned are, in their own words, 10 and 20 hours long. How long would JoH, The Descent and The Trespasser be combined? More than 30 hours imo. It's taken BW a little longer to bring out the big one than it will apparently take CDPR, but there isn't much difference in content.

[In Exile]

Ballad of Gay Tony and Undead Nightmare are over 5 years old. Awakening-sized expansions aren't that profitable anymore and are extremely rarely done. That's why Witcher 3 having 2 expansions is such a big deal, because no one really does that anymore.

We don't know the scale of TW3s DLC - and it IS DLC, no matter what marketing fluff they invent.

Games that have "expanded" content really are more the AC series of games, which ultimately do same-engine follow ups.

[SurelyForth]

Is there someplace I can bet money on how long a thread can go before it becomes a "but Witcher 3/CDPR does, why not DAI/BW?" ****** off? I'm getting pretty good at guessing...

[Ariella]

Is there someplace I can bet money on how long a thread can go before it becomes a "but Witcher 3/CDPR does, why not DAI/BW?" ****** off? I'm getting pretty good at guessing...

I'm with you. We could make a mint on this.

[Lost Mercenary]

Expansions unfortunately do seem to be a trend long past at this point. With the advent of the digital age and the success of smaller scale DLC that can be produced quicker they seem to have quietly gone into the night.

 

Personally I don't really mind. Awakening was magnificent and all but the DLC we've been getting has still been top notch with Bioware at their A game. OK maybe not so much with Descent but I'll let that one little snag pass.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Dragon Age Origins?

 

Depending on how one wants to define "story DLC" you could probably say ME2 had five as well, but I think you'd have to stretch the definition...

I think Mass Effect 2 counts. Both Zaeed and Kasumi have a story mission and add to the main story by serving roles in the suicide mission. Then there was Overlord, Lair of the Shadow Broker, and Arrival.

[Ariella]

I think Mass Effect 2 counts. Both Zaeed and Kasumi have a story mission and add to the main story by serving roles in the suicide mission. Then there was Overlord, Lair of the Shadow Broker, and Arrival.

I'd argue Zaeed and Kasumi considering their primary purpose was to add companions, and every companion would have a loyalty quest as part of the package since it's part of the squad dynamic of the suicide mission survival.

Overlord, Arrival, and Shadow Broker are specifically designed to tell a story.

[devSin]

No, no expansion. This was known when the marketing survey revealed that the final adventure for the Inquisitor would be $15 DLC (many months ago now).
 

Are they just trying to not be overzealous?

What "DLC" means has changed. It takes a lot more effort to produce a Trespasser than it ever did a Leliana's Song or a Witch Hunt. I would suggest waiting until all the content is out before judging BioWare's ambition (already, I'd say what we have is greater than all of Origins' DLC combined, both in quality and in substance).

I was hoping that the Microsoft scam would let us get an extra DLC, but apparently all that talk about how the deal would let them do more was just that: talk. Should have known better.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Are they? I played and love Witcher 3, but I haven't been following the DLC info. If that's the size of them, then there hardly expansions. Or they are, and Bioware just labels expansions as DLC now? I mean, technically aren't expansions DLC anyways?

It's the number of hours they have claimed each piece of add-on takes. At release, it might take more, it might make less to finish in a satisfactory manner. They marketed them as expansions obviously because it's better PR.

The difference between DLC and expansion is largely in terms of length, I find. While it is true DLC can easily end up being shallow/overpriced (Bioware being guilty with the Spoils of the X item packs, not to mention cosmetic DLC like say Evolve did), it can also very well add a lot the the game just as an expansion could. I don't consider one inherently superior to the other, albeit some people think expansions are. I suspect many haven't played the less good expansions of yore such as Tales of the Sword Coast or Icewind Dale's level packs.

I'm pretty sure TW3 will have good addons since the base game was great. But I do find it disingenuous that they market them as ''expansions'' just because that term resonates more with some fans. The first add-on is (per CDPR) 10 hours and has no new areas, that's hardly something to write home about if you ask me. Jaws of Hakkon easily had 10 hour's worth of content, and Citadel had more.

[Majestic Jazz]

It's not even 2 expansions. Going by them, it's one 10 hour pack (which is on par with Jaws of Hakkon, give or take) and a 20 hour one (which is either a small expansion or a big, Citadel-esque DLC).

I'm also always amused that people take it as fact. Might, you know, wait for these addons to be released before using them as a comparison point.

Awakening was about 20 hours or even less and that was an expansion. What makes the TW3 one so different?

[Giantdeathrobot]

Awakening was about 20 hours or even less and that was an expansion. What makes the TW3 one so different?

I said it 20 hours was an expansion from my PoV. Just a relatively small one.

Obviously, this assumes it has 20 hours of content in total. If it has more in the end, it's going to be a rather hefty expansion which is nice. If it has less, it then wouldn't be that different from a big, Citadel-like DLC. We won't know until it actually releases. I fully intend on buying them myself if I hear good things, but I very rarely pre-order, and never add-ons.