I think it sets a bad precadent. We're getting to the point where games seem more and more like an empty purchase, with the pushing of on-disc DLC, online passes etc. If games are going to be sold incomplete then I think their prices should reflect that- while I like DAI, I might not have purchased it at full price if I'd have known that most of the hundreds' of hours worth of content that was promised was going to be fetch-quest grinding and that the meaningful ending to the game wouldn't be released until almost a year later.
Getting back on topic, I feel the Souls' franchise approach to DLC was the one that I agree with most- that it should enhance the main game experience, but not be a necessary component of that game experience. Lair of the Shadow Broker was one of the best examples of this; it was fantastic, but you weren't hurt particularly if you didn't have it. The same of Leviathan, Omega, JoH and Descent. But things like Javik and Trespasser are very significant things to keep gated from the main game. This isn't even going into the topic of how last-gen owners were screwed over with this round of DLC but I don't want to get into that.
Going to an episodic model wouldn't be a bad idea. Bioware seem to be in the habit of taking on a bigger workload than they can manage and in their last two big releases it's shown, aswell as the debacle of DA2. It would absolutely be nice for player feedback to be taken into account more, too; I truly believe had the Extended Cut shipped with ME3 there wouldn't have been as much furor over that game. The bitterness seems to stick around because of the abrubt, expositionless fade-to-black ending to what was, until then, an amazing game, and it almost seems to me like Bioware are afraid to write the stories they want for fear of upsetting so many people again.
I know I'm being a bit of a hypocrite here because I bought Trespasser pretty much on release and pre-ordered the bug-rife Digital Deluxe Edition on PC. While I thought Trespasser was a worthwhile purchase, I was still a little unhappy at only now being able to find some closure to my Inquisitor's story. I think too often we consumers forget how much power we actually have; I'll definitely be waiting for some sort of sale in the future.
I agree with the bolded. If the base game is incomplete, the price should reflect that. That said, I would cheerfully have paid $85 ($70 Digital Deluxe edition + $15 Trespasser) for DAI, so I don't consider myself overcharged in the slightest. In actual fact, I don't consider myself overcharged and I bought the Inquisitor's Edition for myself, the Deluxe Edition for my sister, JoH, Descent, and Trespasser.
But yeah, I think we're on the same page with regards to an episodic model. It would be an interesting experiment, and one that might benefit the player tremendously, as it would allow evolution within the game's lifecycle without waiting for the next title to try something new. But it has drawbacks. It would pretty much force them to go to a strictly digital format. I like to have physical copies of the games I buy, as do many others. If it were a choice between having a Dragon Age game in digital format or not having it at all, I wouldn't hesitate to buy it anyway, but some might. An episodic model would be a gamble for them. On the one hand, they'd save money because they'd be able to avoid dumping more resources into unpopular features, but on the other, a poor initial showing might discourage players from buying the second installment. On the one hand, it would keep the hype going longer. There would still be a longish wait for the first installment because they'd need to pitch the game and get green-lighted, then develop the infrastructure, etc, but after that, they would be pretty much guaranteed publicity every six months or so when they released a new installment. That said, Dragon Age isn't an only child. Like every other corporation, they're streamlining and economizing, and that seems to mean that they're sharing staff among Dragon Age, Mass Effect, and the new IP. They would probably be able to charge $40 for each of 3 installments, say, but they might not be willing to dedicate their staff to one IP for such an extended interval. Yeah, they might agree that selling three $40 installments over 18 months is more profitable than selling one $70 game and a handful of DLC, but it's even more profitable for them to release one $70 game, a handful of DLC, and then another $70 game 18 months later.
Retour en haut
nice place to be for a change, the minority, long may it continue 
