17 réponses à ce sujet

[winterrosa]

Hello,

I am a long time Bioware fan and a frequent buyer of EA's brand in general due to the series I enjoy. I am angry, but I understand that last gen support limited the DA:I team in producing content, and by ending DLC support it allows for more flexibility somehow. I would just like if someone explained to me and everyone exactly why they decided the DLC was best if only available on next gen and what limitations old gen imposed? Why release it on old gen in the first place if it was such a limitation? I really can't believe Bioware and EA did not have this planned ahead of time or that it wasn't on the table from the start. Either way why didn't Bioware release a statement on the potential lack of future support? Why did Bioware consistently say they were planning more storyline dlc for Inquisition when it was a lie. I say it was a lie because press releases said there would be more than one story DLC and Jaws of Hakkon added nothing to the game and Descent while interesting lore wise had very little story. Beyond that it was a lie because anyway they only meant specific consoles would get dlc.

 

Perhaps if someone at Bioware just apologized to last gen console owners for essentially not giving them access to the whole product I would feel better, but right now it seems like everyone is just smiling and nodding and blaming people who can't afford the xbox one or of PS4 or a new laptop for holding Bioware back. It would be nice to just be acknowledged as valid fans and buyers of a product who were not being manipulated into buying the game more than once if possible. On one hand I am somewhat glad I got to play the game, but on the other I would rather not if I wasn't going to play the whole story. Someone could easily say "Why complain. You got the game", but the issue is I feel this situation was either poorly thought out a last minute decision, or Bioware/EA thought this would be a good way to get people to buy the game twice which I consider a deceptive business practice. Right now I feel like I was mislead and cheated, promised a full product and all that is entailed with it only to be told that I don't get to actually finish the storyline of my Inquisitor unless I spend money on a brand new console and another copy of the game. Further to not offer players a way to just download the game on new consoles really feels like EA is attempting to reach into our pockets for money people have already willingly given them. I would just like information or an explaination that addresses those factors.

 

I was fine with it for a while then I began to think about it, and I feel very much like I was sold Dragon Age Inquisition under false pretenses. Honestly I kind of feel punished for not being able to afford a new gen console. Even if I upgrade my laptop or force old Bess(my laptop) to run DA:I then I have to start over from scratch. Was that the intention? Was it to try and make players buy the game twice alongside DLC?

 

I don't think I'm asking for much of anything. I would just like an explanation because as a consumer of Bioware products for a number of years I would think Bioware and EA would have enough respect for their fans to just give something very clear, polite, and reasoned as a response. That is all I ask.

[FKA_Servo]

I imagine is that EA was betting on the hugenormous install base of old gen systems adding a ton of sales, and that bet didn't pay off.

 

They gave an explanation back when they dropped support, and while it was probably not adequately contrite and had a whole lot of spin going on, it's probably the most you can ask for. I think they probably like working for Bioware too much to admit that some big mistakes were made, but it's safe to say that they know it was a screw up. I think that should be enough.

 

Regardless of spin, I would hope it was apparent that playing a 2014 game on hardware that was middling a decade ago would not result in the optimal experience. And honestly - eventually, you're gonna have to upgrade.

[chrstnmonks]

 

Hello,

I am a long time Bioware fan and a frequent buyer of EA's brand in general due to the series I enjoy. I am angry, but I understand that last gen support limited the DA:I team in producing content, and by ending DLC support it allows for more flexibility somehow. I would just like if someone explained to me and everyone exactly why they decided the DLC was best if only available on next gen and what limitations old gen imposed? Why release it on old gen in the first place if it was such a limitation? I really can't believe Bioware and EA did not have this planned ahead of time or that it wasn't on the table from the start. Either way why didn't Bioware release a statement on the potential lack of future support? Why did Bioware consistently say they were planning more storyline dlc for Inquisition when it was a lie. I say it was a lie because press releases said there would be more than one story DLC and Jaws of Hakkon added nothing to the game and Descent while interesting lore wise had very little story. Beyond that it was a lie because anyway they only meant specific consoles would get dlc.

 

Perhaps if someone at Bioware just apologized to last gen console owners for essentially not giving them access to the whole product I would feel better, but right now it seems like everyone is just smiling and nodding and blaming people who can't afford the xbox one or of PS4 or a new laptop for holding Bioware back. It would be nice to just be acknowledged as valid fans and buyers of a product who were not being manipulated into buying the game more than once if possible. On one hand I am somewhat glad I got to play the game, but on the other I would rather not if I wasn't going to play the whole story. Someone could easily say "Why complain. You got the game", but the issue is I feel this situation was either poorly thought out a last minute decision, or Bioware/EA thought this would be a good way to get people to buy the game twice which I consider a deceptive business practice. Right now I feel like I was mislead and cheated, promised a full product and all that is entailed with it only to be told that I don't get to actually finish the storyline of my Inquisitor unless I spend money on a brand new console and another copy of the game. Further to not offer players a way to just download the game on new consoles really feels like EA is attempting to reach into our pockets for money people have already willingly given them. I would just like information or an explaination that addresses those factors.

 

I was fine with it for a while then I began to think about it, and I feel very much like I was sold Dragon Age Inquisition under false pretenses. Honestly I kind of feel punished for not being able to afford a new gen console. Even if I upgrade my laptop or force old Bess(my laptop) to run DA:I then I have to start over from scratch. Was that the intention? Was it to try and make players buy the game twice alongside DLC?

 

I don't think I'm asking for much of anything. I would just like an explanation because as a consumer of Bioware products for a number of years I would think Bioware and EA would have enough respect for their fans to just give something very clear, polite, and reasoned as a response. That is all I ask.

 

I am betting that alot of it has to do with your 10 year old hardware.That maybe new gen sales exploded and the game didn't sale well on last gen. Hell, one could say it barely worked on old gen. Pretty much anything you want to think at this point is fine, because I doubt anymore explanations are coming.You were sold the game on ps3/xbox 360 and that is what you got. Noone sold you anything under false pretenses. The need to upgrade occurs regardless of platforms. You are not being punished. It is something that naturally happens with gaming. If you continue gaming you will need to upgrade at some point.

[winterrosa]

I imagine is that EA was betting on the hugenormous install base of old gen systems adding a ton of sales, and that bet didn't pay off.

 

They gave an explanation back when they dropped support, and while it was probably not adequately contrite and had a whole lot of spin going on, it's probably the most you can ask for. I think they probably like working for Bioware too much to admit that some big mistakes were made, but it's safe to say that they know it was a screw up. I think that should be enough.

 

Regardless of spin, I would hope it was apparent that playing a 2014 game on hardware that was middling a decade ago would not result in the optimal experience. And honestly - eventually, you're gonna have to upgrade.

While you make a good point on your last bit it ultimately has very little to do with my point. I give them that credit...what I don't give them credit for is essentially seeming like they planned this to urge people to buy the game twice in order to truly finish Inquisition. I think it's part of a greater DLC problem where Lore and story additions that actually round out and complete the story of the game are not large enough for expansions and are withheld from release because money, but that's another topic. My point is it doesn't really matter how old the system is in regards to the player knowing it. Bioware accepted that and the technological limitations were known so why release the game on old gen at all? I'm not trying to sound snippy, but people have been saying that to people upset at Bioware over this for a long time. I understand why, but no one directs this back at Bioware. If they knew old gen was an issue why release the game in that format only to then discontinue the story, and not just that discontinue the ending, for some people? Why do it so unapologetically and throw people who may not be able to afford the newest console or computer under the bus, as though we made Bioware limit themselves or complicate DA:I? At the moment I feel like this may have been a scam to push players into upgrading to new consoles and rebuy the game.

 

Real truth...I can't upgrade. I don't have a job atm. My older brother got the xbox one last x-mas only because both our parents and his girlfriend pulled together to buy him one. Eventually I will hopefully be able to, but at the moment I can't. So that's why I feel somewhat punished for being unable to afford a console or computer. Those aren't small expenses for a lot of people and god speed to those who can afford it, but it seems...frivolous of Bioware and EA to just be like "Yeah just go buy the game again and a new console." Further there is no reason to buy a new console for me and some other players because the games currently available aren't our cup of tea yet. Part of me wonders if the incentive was also in part to get people to buy not only the game, but the console before they really started depreciating in value. Still with that aside even if I wanted the console I and others can't afford it and some can't even afford to just go rebuy a game. So I would just like to know the business reasons behind that decision. It just seems...to me like Bioware at the very least would have done a bit more...to assuage the people who already spent money with the expectation that Bioware was acting both in their best interests and in a manner that wouldn't lead people to question them or EA on a consumer level.

[winterrosa]

I am betting that alot of it has to do with your 10 year old hardware.That maybe new gen sales exploded and the game didn't sale well on last gen. Hell, one could say it barely worked on old gen. Pretty much anything you want to think at this point is fine, because I doubt anymore explanations are coming.You were sold the game on ps3/xbox 360 and that is what you got. Noone sold you anything under false pretenses. The need to upgrade occurs regardless of platforms. You are not being punished. It is something that naturally happens with gaming. If you continue gaming you will need to upgrade at some point.

Actually Bioware did. They've talked thoroughly about the DLC that would be available to Dragon Age Inquisition owners. They did not specify owners on what platform and from a functional perspective you could argue DLC like Trespasser that concludes a story arc indicates that players have in fact not been sold the full product, but instead parts and the ability to purchase and then access any parts released by Bioware and EA parent company. 

 

From that then one can assume this choice by Bioware/EA to limit access to specific players goes against what they previously said woudl occur before game release and after in regards to DLC. Further Shutting down DLC support has occurred alongside the "brightside" of being able to transfer save data between old and new consoles. Very useful and consumer friendly, yes. However that indicates an expectation that old gen players will upgrade, and while DLC(poorly reviewed DLC that players probably would not rebuy) is available for a limited time Bioware has made it clear they expect players to rebuy the game. In that regard it feels very suspicious because, knowing those ten year old limitations, why bother to release the game on old gen? How could Bioware just suddenly agree to discontinue DLC for consoles when that DLC has been planned and somewhat in the works. Those limitations have been around for years,as you say. The company knew exactly the hardware they were working with, as you said they had ten years with it basically, and they knew the limitations of it. So I question why they would choose to release for old gen at all unless the plan was to essentially make players buy the game twice? 

 

That's the thing. I would love to know the actual technical hurdles they encountered with Trespasser. In part because I question if they even tried to make it old gen compatible, and I question if Trespasser's pre-planning included the idea of discontinuing old gen support before the release of story DLC in order to push players towards re-buying the game. That is fraudulent to me because it is deceptive and the company knowingly engaged in this form of customer deception in order to make money off of people buying the game full price once and then again. It's not about upgrading or not. Even if it was it doesn't matter because Bioware by releasing the game on a ten year old console puts itself forward as expecting to produce content for those consoles. It doesn't matter because Bioware made that choice and put itself forward as giving players across consoles access to the same content and it seems, for suspicious reasons that it was in part a lie in order for them to make more money. That's the pessimistic view of coarse...but there's nothing to dispute it.

 

I find it bad business practice to produce a product and not finish it and then not alert customers that they may not complete the product. If I order a meal from a restuarant that has promised and is known for seven coarse meals and I get five despite paying for seven (at least in part) then I would at least like an explanation technical and business wise in that regard. Or at least a simple apology from the waiter or manager.

[Paul E Dangerously]

Given the game last-genners received and the amount of attention we got from Bioware in general, I'd hesitate to use the term "supported" whatsoever.

 

Also, if I had a quarter for every chucklehead that started spouting noise about "decade old hardware" or "you're gonna have to upgrade" I'd have enough to get a decent PC for everyone in the last-gen support thread. I'm not even joking.

 

Yes, old hardware is a thing. But so is effort, and the last-gen version got as little as humanly possible. Bioware hid the fact up to release, and then afterward just completely left us to go hang. PC people got support, next-gen people got support, last-gen people got a post going "you're making too much noise, pipe down". And that's practically it.

[FKA_Servo]

While you make a good point on your last bit it ultimately has very little to do with my point. I give them that credit...what I don't give them credit for is essentially seeming like they planned this to urge people to buy the game twice in order to truly finish Inquisition. I think it's part of a greater DLC problem where Lore and story additions that actually round out and complete the story of the game are not large enough for expansions and are withheld from release because money, but that's another topic. My point is it doesn't really matter how old the system is in regards to the player knowing it. Bioware accepted that and the technological limitations were known so why release the game on old gen at all? I'm not trying to sound snippy, but people have been saying that to people upset at Bioware over this for a long time. I understand why, but no one directs this back at Bioware. If they knew old gen was an issue why release the game in that format only to then discontinue the story, and not just that discontinue the ending, for some people? Why do it so unapologetically and throw people who may not be able to afford the newest console or computer under the bus, as though we made Bioware limit themselves or complicate DA:I? At the moment I feel like this may have been a scam to push players into upgrading to new consoles and rebuy the game.

 

Real truth...I can't upgrade. I don't have a job atm. My older brother got the xbox one last x-mas only because both our parents and his girlfriend pulled together to buy him one. Eventually I will hopefully be able to, but at the moment I can't. So that's why I feel somewhat punished for being unable to afford a console or computer. Those aren't small expenses for a lot of people and god speed to those who can afford it, but it seems...frivolous of Bioware and EA to just be like "Yeah just go buy the game again and a new console." Further there is no reason to buy a new console for me and some other players because the games currently available aren't our cup of tea yet. Part of me wonders if the incentive was also in part to get people to buy not only the game, but the console before they really started depreciating in value. Still with that aside even if I wanted the console I and others can't afford it and some can't even afford to just go rebuy a game. So I would just like to know the business reasons behind that decision. It just seems...to me like Bioware at the very least would have done a bit more...to assuage the people who already spent money with the expectation that Bioware was acting both in their best interests and in a manner that wouldn't lead people to question them or EA on a consumer level.

 

The whole thing was a disaster, and it was poorly dealt with by Bioware. I don't expect you to e-stalk my posting history or anything, but I tore into them for it, though time and the fact that I'm personally unaffected by it have softened my ardor some. I don't think they should have released the game on old gen systems, and if Bioware wanted to put forth their work in the best possible light, I can't imagine they would have wanted to do so either. I regard it as a cynical cash grab by EA, and dropping support mid-DLC cycle was an unprecedented move that, when taken with some other stuff they've done recently (and whether that "they" is EA or Bioware, I don't know, but I do know who controls the cash flow...) and the way they've responded, makes me more than a little concerned that the brand has been dealt irreparable damage.

 

Still though, you maybe can't upgrade now, but if this is a favored hobby, then probably, eventually, you will. It would have been better if they'd withheld the game from old gen full stop, and then eventually you get to play it when you upgrade. I wouldn't shake my fists at old gen gamers specifically, but eventually, they just need to drop the old gen systems, because they do limit what you can do. They can't make 360 games forever. DAI seems to have had a fraught development cycle from the word go, with the engine change plus old gen co-development leading to some strange priorities and supremely uneven execution. I'm just hopeful that they've got their ducks all in a row for MEA.

[vbibbi]

The whole thing was a disaster, and it was poorly dealt with by Bioware. I don't expect you to e-stalk my posting history or anything, but I tore into them for it, though time and the fact that I'm personally unaffected by it have softened my ardor some. I don't think they should have released the game on old gen systems, and if Bioware wanted to put forth their work in the best possible light, I can't imagine they would have wanted to do so either. I regard it as a cynical cash grab by EA, and dropping support mid-DLC cycle was an unprecedented move and, when taken with some other stuff they've done recently (and whether that "they" is EA or Bioware, I don't know, but I do know who controls the cash flow...) and they way they've responded, I'm more than a little concerned that the brand has been dealt irreparable damage.

 

Still though, you maybe can't upgrade now, but if this is a favored hobby, then probably, eventually, you will. It would have been better if they'd withheld the game from old gen full stop, and then eventually you get to play it when you upgrade. I wouldn't shake my fists at old gen gamers specifically, but eventually, they just need to drop the old gen systems, because they do limit what you can do. They can't make 360 games forever. DAI seems to have had a fraught development cycle from the word go, with the engine change plus old gen co-development leading to some strange priorities and supremely uneven execution. I'm just hopeful that they've got their ducks all in a row for MEA.

I have to say I really appreciate the support from those unaffected by the last-gen drop. Thank you for putting yourself in someone else's shoes and understanding the frustration, even if it doesn't affect you personally. And I completely agree that last gen needs to be dropped, that's the nature of the business. It couldn't have helped Bioware that they had planned on releasing the game a year earlier, when less players would have upgraded to current gen. I guess at that point, it's not cost effective to completely drop last gen after all of that development work.

 

From a business standpoint their actions do make sense. I really do think that an explanation and apology would have gone a long way to diffusing the enmity some in the community now have. I mean, we can reasonably deduce the business decisions behind dropping last gen, many people have posted good reasons for the drop and it's not realistic to demand Bioware go back in time and fix the mistake when they could have done so. But just keeping silent on how this affects some of their fans is disappointing. Especially now that they've released an "epilogue" to the game, which to my mind sounds like it really should be considered part of the DAI story, not optional side content DLC like JOH or Descent.

 

The cynical part of me (i.e. most of me) also sees Bioware using last gen as a scapegoat for many of the criticisms of the game. "We had to remove dynamic keeps we had previously marketed due to last gen limitations"..."we had to scrap some of these amazing features that you're all asking for because of last gen"... Basically they (and their die hard defenders) can say "Didn't like X about the game? It's because of last gen"

[FKA_Servo]

I have to say I really appreciate the support from those unaffected by the last-gen drop. Thank you for putting yourself in someone else's shoes and understanding the frustration, even if it doesn't affect you personally. And I completely agree that last gen needs to be dropped, that's the nature of the business. It couldn't have helped Bioware that they had planned on releasing the game a year earlier, when less players would have upgraded to current gen. I guess at that point, it's not cost effective to completely drop last gen after all of that development work.

 

From a business standpoint their actions do make sense. I really do think that an explanation and apology would have gone a long way to diffusing the enmity some in the community now have. I mean, we can reasonably deduce the business decisions behind dropping last gen, many people have posted good reasons for the drop and it's not realistic to demand Bioware go back in time and fix the mistake when they could have done so. But just keeping silent on how this affects some of their fans is disappointing. Especially now that they've released an "epilogue" to the game, which to my mind sounds like it really should be considered part of the DAI story, not optional side content DLC like JOH or Descent.

 

The cynical part of me (i.e. most of me) also sees Bioware using last gen as a scapegoat for many of the criticisms of the game. "We had to remove dynamic keeps we had previously marketed due to last gen limitations"..."we had to scrap some of these amazing features that you're all asking for because of last gen"... Basically they (and their die hard defenders) can say "Didn't like X about the game? It's because of last gen"

 

Bolded is spot on. And it has to be true, to some extent.

 

We'll never know exactly what aspects of the game explicitly suffered from A) the engine change (which ate up a ton of time and resources) and B ) the limitations imposed by old gen development because they'd obviously never tell us this, but I'm 100% certain that it was considerably more than "none."

 

I think a straight up apology (or some actual redress in the form of digital copies of the game on new gen, though that would be wishful thinking - Destiny did this in that they granted a free upgrade window from old gen to new gen - but I can't think of any proven examples of other developers doing this) would have gone a long way, although I also understand why they can't do that. The content transfer was a nice gesture though, that shows they do care about making it right, to the best of their ability to do so.

[Paul E Dangerously]

Bolded is spot on. And it has to be true, to some extent.

 

We'll never know exactly what aspects of the game explicitly suffered from A) the engine change (which ate up a ton of time and resources) and B ) the limitations imposed by old gen development because they'd obviously never tell us this, but I'm 100% certain that it was considerably more than "none."

 

While I don't know for sure, I almost think they just got caught in mid-cycle. Remember, DAI was delayed a year - otherwise it would've launched in Fall '13, presumably before the November release of the Xbox One and the PS4.

 

I'll wager that at least a good chunk of it was developed for old-gen systems, before EA punted it back a year and gave them time to do the new console versions as well, in addition to stuff like the other playable races.

 

So "held back" may not quite be accurate. Those types of development cycles never work well, I've seen.

[DeeHama328]

. . . I think it's part of a greater DLC problem where Lore and story additions that actually round out and complete the story of the game are not large enough for expansions and are withheld from release . . .

 

I think the core storyline is the main point that prompted this thread, which I have read through this morning. Are ALL future games going to omit such essentials? “Want the full story? Buy three DLCs, guess which one determines the fate of your organization!” (And your protagonist’s life and limbs . . . ) You don't need the Origins or DA2 DLC to have a complete story, but the last ten minutes of Trespasser are essential to the core game.

 

BioWare led us to believe we were buying a complete game, not an episodic one with severe restrictions on the last installment.

 

The last two conversations of the Trespasser DLC are essential to the main game--perhaps their content could be added as a dream sequence at the end--should have been included on all platforms, and should not have cost any purchaser of the original game new money. Then the full DLC would be a fun bonus for those who could afford its requirements, instead of a message to a large demographic of gamers that we only actually get part of the essentials we thought we purchased 10 months ago or pre-ordered sooner than that (and patiently waited years for).

 

Dragon Age: Inquisition's original "ending" left questions, but could have been considered an ending. Then the Trespasser DLC proved that the core game omitted an ending. Whatever our opinions on Mass Effect 3, it had an ending playable on the device used for the core storyline, no additional purchase required.

[FKA_Servo]

I think the core storyline is the main point that prompted this thread, which I have read through this morning. Are ALL future games going to omit such essentials? “Want the full story? Buy three DLCs, guess which one determines the fate of your organization!” (And your protagonist’s life and limbs . . . ) You don't need the Origins or DA2 DLC to have a complete story, but the last ten minutes of Trespasser are essential to the core game.

 

BioWare led us to believe we were buying a complete game, not an episodic one with severe restrictions on the last installment.

 

The last two conversations of the Trespasser DLC are essential to the main game--perhaps their content could be added as a dream sequence at the end--should have been included on all platforms, and should not have cost any purchaser of the original game new money. Then the full DLC would be a fun bonus for those who could afford its requirements, instead of a message to a large demographic of gamers that we only actually get part of the essentials we thought we purchased 10 months ago or pre-ordered sooner than that (and patiently waited years for).

 

Dragon Age: Inquisition's original "ending" left questions, but could have been considered an ending. Then the Trespasser DLC proved that the core game omitted an ending. Whatever our opinions on Mass Effect 3, it had an ending playable on the device used for the core storyline, no additional purchase required.

 

I'm not going to defend the DLC support debacle, but I wouldn't want to see the end of this sort of release, and I don't feel cheated at it not being in the main game.

 

I like expansions, and whether I like it or not, the form they're taking now is DLC. If I really enjoy a game, I'll want new stuff to do in it. If the content on offer justifies the price tag (which will forever be subjective, I know), And has some meaty story stuff, I'm happy to have more. And I don't necessarily think that it's any different than waiting for a full blown sequel to address unanswered questions.

 

And it's arguably not as skeevy as Day 1 DLC like Javik, which they'll hopefully never do again.

[Paul E Dangerously]

I'm not going to defend the DLC support debacle, but I wouldn't want to see the end of this sort of release, and I don't feel cheated at it not being in the main game.

 

I like expansions, and whether I like it or not, the form they're taking now is DLC. If I really enjoy a game, I'll want new stuff to do in it. If the content on offer justifies the price tag (which will forever be subjective, I know), And has some meaty story stuff, I'm happy to have more. And I don't necessarily think that it's any different than waiting for a full blown sequel to address unanswered questions.

 

And it's arguably not as skeevy as Day 1 DLC like Javik, which they'll hopefully never do again.

 

This is worse, and I'm not just saying that. Bioware put the real ending to DAI as DLC, and only 3/5 platforms are getting it. Yes, removing content to put as Day 1 DLC is bad. But so is not putting in an honest-to-God ending so you can sell it later, and then risk not getting that whatsoever.

[DeeHama328]

I'm not going to defend the DLC support debacle, but I wouldn't want to see the end of this sort of release, and I don't feel cheated at it not being in the main game.

 

I like expansions, and whether I like it or not, the form they're taking now is DLC. If I really enjoy a game, I'll want new stuff to do in it. If the content on offer justifies the price tag (which will forever be subjective, I know), And has some meaty story stuff, I'm happy to have more. And I don't necessarily think that it's any different than waiting for a full blown sequel to address unanswered questions.

 

And it's arguably not as skeevy as Day 1 DLC like Javik, which they'll hopefully never do again.

 

 

This is worse, and I'm not just saying that. Bioware put the real ending to DAI as DLC, and only 3/5 platforms are getting it. Yes, removing content to put as Day 1 DLC is bad. But so is not putting in an honest-to-God ending so you can sell it later, and then risk not getting that whatsoever.

 

I agree about the Day 1 DLC and expansions. I like Javik, yet he's not essential to the core story or ending of ME3. I think the Solas conversation of Trespasser, and choosing the fate of the Inquisition, is core story and essential ending material, possibly an expansion, not extra DLC - perhaps BioWare either couldn't include it in the original release or hadn't thought up those details yet (or perhaps the writers have known it all along), but not having it on previous-gen makes an incomplete game.

[FKA_Servo]

I agree about the Day 1 DLC and expansions. I like Javik, yet he's not essential to the core story or ending of ME3. I think the Solas conversation of Trespasser, and choosing the fate of the Inquisition, is core story and essential ending material, possibly an expansion, not extra DLC - perhaps BioWare either couldn't include it in the original release or hadn't thought up those details yet (or perhaps the writers have known it all along), but not having it on previous-gen makes an incomplete game.

 

Which I emphatically agree with. The fact is that they pulled a real boner with the DLC support issue.

 

But I'm saying that the sort of content included therein is exactly the sort of thing I'd like to get in a DLC - a bunch of play time and some meaningful story reveals.

[Fryea Valkyrie]

I am heartbroken.

 

I already struggle to make ends meet and while I do eventually plan to at some point upgrade to the next gen, after the debacle I will no longer BE a console player. This is ridiculous! I think a vast majority from now on will be PC because at least no matter what I WILL GET SUPPORT for MY GAME I PAID FULL PRICE FOR.

 

I can live without the fun stuff that is a $3 addition. I splurged and have been chugging through slowly the DLC for Jaws of Hakkon or rather HAD BEEN and after this heartbreak I don't think I will be.

 

I can't believe I'd have to dish out money for a new console, buy the game all over again with all the DLC, import it over to the new console and hope everything got transferred over just fine.

 

I've poured over 90+ of my heart and soul into this game. I've scoured it for every side quest I could find and still enjoy tackling the dragons down one by one.

 

After this, I don't think I will be.

 

The game will collect dust because of the sorrow and misery I feel at my Inquisitor and Inquisition getting cut out of their happy ending, the answers to their questions and I don't think I'll even bother replaying the game.

 

I can't bring myself to.

 

Even if I were to port over to PC at this point, I would still be forking over quite a bit of money to rebuy the game and the DLC not to mention redoing all those 90+ all over again.

 

I'm just sitting here in my small rock of an island crying my dwarven heart out.

[DeeHama328]

I am heartbroken . . . 

 

I'm just sitting here in my small rock of an island crying my dwarven heart out.

My sympathies, friend. I hope your heart can find joy again.

I was okay Tuesday, pretty despondent Wednesday (I actually lost sleep over this), and doing okay today playing the PS3 version, pretending that our fate will be as awesome as the end of ME2.

[chrstnmonks]

Actually Bioware did. They've talked thoroughly about the DLC that would be available to Dragon Age Inquisition owners. They did not specify owners on what platform and from a functional perspective you could argue DLC like Trespasser that concludes a story arc indicates that players have in fact not been sold the full product, but instead parts and the ability to purchase and then access any parts released by Bioware and EA parent company. 

 

From that then one can assume this choice by Bioware/EA to limit access to specific players goes against what they previously said woudl occur before game release and after in regards to DLC. Further Shutting down DLC support has occurred alongside the "brightside" of being able to transfer save data between old and new consoles. Very useful and consumer friendly, yes. However that indicates an expectation that old gen players will upgrade, and while DLC(poorly reviewed DLC that players probably would not rebuy) is available for a limited time Bioware has made it clear they expect players to rebuy the game. In that regard it feels very suspicious because, knowing those ten year old limitations, why bother to release the game on old gen? How could Bioware just suddenly agree to discontinue DLC for consoles when that DLC has been planned and somewhat in the works. Those limitations have been around for years,as you say. The company knew exactly the hardware they were working with, as you said they had ten years with it basically, and they knew the limitations of it. So I question why they would choose to release for old gen at all unless the plan was to essentially make players buy the game twice? 

 

That's the thing. I would love to know the actual technical hurdles they encountered with Trespasser. In part because I question if they even tried to make it old gen compatible, and I question if Trespasser's pre-planning included the idea of discontinuing old gen support before the release of story DLC in order to push players towards re-buying the game. That is fraudulent to me because it is deceptive and the company knowingly engaged in this form of customer deception in order to make money off of people buying the game full price once and then again. It's not about upgrading or not. Even if it was it doesn't matter because Bioware by releasing the game on a ten year old console puts itself forward as expecting to produce content for those consoles. It doesn't matter because Bioware made that choice and put itself forward as giving players across consoles access to the same content and it seems, for suspicious reasons that it was in part a lie in order for them to make more money. That's the pessimistic view of coarse...but there's nothing to dispute it.

 

I find it bad business practice to produce a product and not finish it and then not alert customers that they may not complete the product. If I order a meal from a restuarant that has promised and is known for seven coarse meals and I get five despite paying for seven (at least in part) then I would at least like an explanation technical and business wise in that regard. Or at least a simple apology from the waiter or manager.

I see this accusation leveled at Bioware that they wanted to force an upgrade. But answer me a question do you think Sony and Microsoft disapproves of this? Why is this accusation never leveled at them? Seems to me they too would want players to upgrade. are they themselves not getting ready to cut support for the old gen.

Would any apology really make you feel better at this point? Because anything they say will be pretty much flamed at this point.