77 réponses à ce sujet

[pkypereira]

I bought all the ME DLC's last year on Black Friday, PSN had them all for 3.99 each except Arrival (6.99 so I didn't buy it, just watched the playthrough video on youtube). I thought they were worth the 3.99, not sure if I would've paid regular price on them though. But they added around 10 hours of playthrough for $16 so I was pretty ok with it. I would not have been ok spending $60 for 10 extra hours.

[straykat]

Are people counting DLC as microtrans now? Because I'm partly guilty. I thought microtransactions were a multiplayer thing.

[MaxQuartiroli]

What's the difference between a $5 DLC that takes an hour to complete, a $10 DLC that takes two hours, or a $15 one that takes three?

 

None, in fact I am not fond of any of them.

[Quarian Master Race]

Are people counting DLC as microtrans now? Because I'm partly guilty. I thought microtransactions were a multiplayer thing.

"This extra content includes everything we might purchase through these MT systems, including weapon and character skins, additional items and materials, in-game currency, etc. It also includes DLC bundles, map packs, and things of that nature"

 

and no, microtransactions are not a "multiplayer thing". ME singleplayer had plenty of them for example (alternate appearance packs, weapon bundles etc.).

[Applepie_Svk]

Of course DA:O is the game which has the smaller razio of core-narration DLC, but the highest one belongs to DA2 (where 1 DLC out of 2 is tied to the plot, and it would have probably been 2 out of 3 if they had released Exalted March). And ME2 is not very better than ME 3 considering that you had 2 plot related DLC out of 4 (i won't consider Zaeed and Firewalker because they were released for free). To be honest I would say that compared to DA2 and ME2 the third installations lowered the ratio, since after the day-1 DLC none of the other ME3 DLC was essential for the main plot. And for DA:I only Trespasser counts, while JoH and Descent are totally optional (unless the Titans won't have a big role in future games....)

 

On a side note, almost DA:O DLC were very overprized and short, both in gameplay and content, therefore I am not very fond of that model.

 

Well I would disagree about ME3, I think that each one of the DLCs were cut out of core narrative or atleast its story parts.

It was told by Gamble, that they were going to recycle some old ideas from ME2 into the ME3, which happened to be most likely either way Omega DLC or Citadel - clone thing DLC or both of them. Personaly Omega is least invasive for me, from all those DLCs that were made for ME3.

Then Javik should be included no matter what in the game, because lot of the plot was tied to a Prothean´s culture, not to mentioned that previous drafts of story(Dark energy ending) were even more focused on Protheans. 

Leviathans, do I need to even begin with ?

 

I think that from all of ME and DA games is ME3 worst of them all with its DLC model, because it´s selling more of a plot related stuff than any other game and mentioned ratio betwen plot related and non-related stuff was totally erased. 

 

On for that note, I think that DLCs should either way add bit of story, but not related to core, and add some new maps as much some loot and challange, rather then dig into story and add something just to appologize for its bad ending.

[straykat]

 

"This extra content includes everything we might purchase through these MT systems, including weapon and character skins, additional items and materials, in-game currency, etc. It also includes DLC bundles, map packs, and things of that nature"

 

and no, microtransactions are not a "multiplayer thing". ME singleplayer had plenty of them for example (alternate appearance packs, weapon bundles etc.).

 

 

Fair enough. I thought MT were those weapon and item packs in ME3 multiplayer. I thought the word originated with COD multiplayer. In which case, I'll pass. That's what "micro" sounded like to me. lol. Not so much the Citadel DLC or something.

[Iakus]

None, in fact I am not fond of any of them.

Fair enough

[Il Divo]

In fact I tend to consider all of them a little too short for their genre...

 

Traditionally-speaking that's probably true. Going back to the older top-down view-point, a lot of the older Bioware games were substantially longer and much larger. 

 

YMMV, but for myself, I tend to not be a fan of the open world approach, as Bioware's handled it. I could go in more depth, but it would probably end up as a rant against the nature of side quests/exploration. 

[AlanC9]

indeed, but with each new game the ratio of plot related DLCs is increasing. I wouldn´t mind to have some ending DLC, like Arrival to be included at the end of DLC cycle, rather than to have several DLCs that are cut out of game and sold extra. That´s why for me personaly DA:O supperior with its DLC model to all other new BioWare´s games.

"Cut out of game" is just confused. That stuff isn't ever going to be in the games in the real world, unless something else is cut to make it fit the budget. I suppose EA could nuke oroduction values back to 2005 levels and make more content, but in any dev cycle there are going to be ideas that can't fit the game budget.

[straykat]

"Cut out of game" is just confused. That stuff isn't ever going to be in the games in the real world, unless something else is cut to make it fit the budget. I suppose EA could nuke oroduction values back to 2005 levels and make more content, but in any dev cycle there are going to be ideas that can't fit the game budget.

 

I think they may be referring to armor sets and such. Like a seperate Avvar item DLC, yet also an Avvar story DLC.

 

It's not confusing. It's nonsense, even in a world full of cheesy DLC ideas.

[MaxQuartiroli]

Well I would disagree about ME3, I think that each one of the DLCs were cut out of core narrative or atleast its story parts.

It was told by Gamble, that they were going to recycle some old ideas from ME2 into the ME3, which happened to be most likely either way Omega DLC or Citadel - clone thing DLC or both of them. Personaly Omega is least invasive for me, from all those DLCs that were made for ME3.

Then Javik should be included no matter what in the game, because lot of the plot was tied to a Prothean´s culture, not to mentioned that previous drafts of story(Dark energy ending) were even more focused on Protheans. 

Leviathans, do I need to even begin with ?

 

I think that from all of ME and DA games is ME3 worst of them all with its DLC model, because it´s selling more of a plot related stuff than any other game and mentioned ratio betwen plot related and non-related stuff was totally erased. 

 

On for that note, I think that DLCs should either way add bit of story, but not related to core, and add some new maps as much some loot and challange, rather then dig into story and add something just to appologize for its bad ending.

 

I think that whether a DLC can be considered essential or not for the plot is a matter of perspective. Personally I consider that a game without Javik would really lose something, while I don't think that it would change my experience or that my story would feel incomplete if I had not knew about Leviathans. I consider that DLC to be on a par with JoH: both of them allow you to discover something about the past, and to unveil some shocking mistery, but I don't consider either of them to be really influent for our character's mission. Perhaps for many other players this could be different.

 

 

YMMV, but for myself, I tend to not be a fan of the open world approach, as Bioware's handled it.

 

Neither am I.. as a matter of fact my favorite Bioware game/model is still BG2.

[Iakus]

"Cut out of game" is just confused. That stuff isn't ever going to be in the games in the real world, unless something else is cut to make it fit the budget. I suppose EA could nuke oroduction values back to 2005 levels and make more content, but in any dev cycle there are going to be ideas that can't fit the game budget.

I think it's a bit more complicated than that.

 

We all know that not everything planned to be in the game makes. It.  And some of those idea do end up getting refined and becoming DLC.  Things such as Lair of the Shadow Broker.  And even individual scenes, such as Joker trying to score free drinks with (greatly exaggerated) tales of his heroics in the Citadel Coup in the Citadel DLC, or Josephine's opera scene in Trespasser.

 

While this stuff isn't "cut" from the main game to be made into DLC, it is material originally thought of for the main game.  Not really the same thing, I know.

 

But what muddies the water further is the whole "on disk DLC" Stuff like "from Ashes" where a partially completed (or even largely completed) DLC is already part of the game itself just waiting to be unlocked.  That's a somewhat greyer area.  And other plot-centered DLC tends to get lumped in with it.

[straykat]

Javik was DLC because they couldn't do all the story they wanted.. and then changed his role to cram in at the tail end of development.

 

 

What I'd want is what Casey Hudson wanted.. He asked for time extensions, and it's something he admitted he regretted when they couldn't get it. Many of the things people complained about would have been better, not just Javik. Even Kai Leng sounded better.

[Sartoz]

If it provides them comparable enjoyment to anything else they could've spent that money on, which is eminently possible, then purchasing it is a sensible decision.

                                                                                                    <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

Perhaps. However, my thinking is always to get value for my money.

 

So, buying a good looking helmet that gives equal or lower defense numbers is plain silly. Maybe it's because I play RTS games where fluffery gets you killed or HoI war simulation games that requires tactical and strategic advantages to win/stay alive.....

[AlanC9]

But what muddies the water further is the whole "on disk DLC" Stuff like "from Ashes" where a partially completed (or even largely completed) DLC is already part of the game itself just waiting to be unlocked.  That's a somewhat greyer area.  And other plot-centered DLC tends to get lumped in with it.

That assumes that "the game itself" is anything on the disc, of course. But, yeah, that leads to unnecessary butthurt, so the devs are probably better off just wasting everybody's bandwidth and holding the content back for a few days.

[straykat]

That assumes that "the game itself" is anything on the disc, of course. But, yeah, that leads to unnecessary butthurt, so the devs are probably better off just wasting everybody's bandwidth and holding the content back for a few days.

 

It isn't butthurt. It's normal. Just consumers clashing with corporate practices. Few people like underhanded stuff like this, when it comes to money.

 

At the very least, they need to find a way to be more shady about their practices. This is just blatant and transparent. If you're going to be a dick, cover your tracks better.

[PhroXenGold]

                                                                                                    <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

Perhaps. However, my thinking is always to get value for my money.

 

So, buying a good looking helmet that gives equal or lower defense numbers is plain silly. Maybe it's because I play RTS games where fluffery gets you killed or HoI war simulation games that requires tactical and strategic advantages to win/stay alive.....

 

But if a significant portion of someone's enjoyment comes from the aesthetics and not the effectiveness, then buying such a helmet could well be good value for money.

 

And hell, HoI looks way better with the unit packs  

[Jewellzify]

Personally I do not consider DLC to be micro-transactions. MT come into play with multi-player stuff and trying to making the MP format more like mobile gaming (which is wrong. Personally, I do not have an issue with purchasing DLC as long as I have a beginning, middle, and end to the original game without any DLC that makes sense. If the game is enjoyable, then I would possibly buy the DLC's. An example of when DLC is done wrong is Destiny: Destiny ended without giving any type of resolution to the problem at hand and then Destiny released a DLC with the ending included... That is when DLC is wrong and should not be purchased.  

[Cheviot]

But what muddies the water further is the whole "on disk DLC" Stuff like "from Ashes" where a partially completed (or even largely completed) DLC is already part of the game itself just waiting to be unlocked.  That's a somewhat greyer area.  And other plot-centered DLC tends to get lumped in with it.

Was the on-disc stuff ever found to be anything other than Javik's model?

[Guitar-Hero]

They are.

 

Problem is, they are also commercial art. No matter what, that is their first prime motivator; to be passion projects that make money. So your stance is noble, but foolish, as a lot of games will follow through this, a lot of big games, at least.

It is what it is man. I am not trying to change anybody or their opinion, if people want to use microtransactions its not up to me to judge or throw shade their way, but i know i feel dumb or not.  

[Quarian Master Race]

Personally I do not consider DLC to be micro-transactions.  

You're making an arbitrary distinction. It is still additional money for content. The only difference is the respective amounts of money spent and content received.

Arguably in ME's case the SP microtransactions have been more egregiously Pay2Win oriented than the MP ones, since you can get everything that MP offers for free by simply playing and unlocking it, but in order to get certain weapons and armors in SP you have to pay for them. I can complete ME3's SP campaign a hundred times and I will never unlock anything from the Firepower Pack without paying extra money for it, for instance.

[straykat]

What's funny is that items barely even matter to me in ME. I can do well with a damn Avenger.

 

My favorite moments where it's a challenge at all is more about the map design. Which doesn't happen enough, unfortunately.

[themikefest]

Javik was DLC because they couldn't do all the story they wanted.. and then changed his role to cram in at the tail end of development.

 

 

What I'd want is what Casey Hudson wanted.. He asked for time extensions, and it's something he admitted he regretted when they couldn't get it. Many of the things people complained about would have been better, not just Javik. Even Kai Leng sounded better.

I remember reading a few of your posts about stuff that might've been in the game if more time was given. Too bad. I liked a few of the ideas

[MissOuJ]

I've never had a problem with paying for DLC, and I have even occasionally paid for the completely cosmic DLC / weapon packs, but MT is something I'll probably never get used to - possibly because I'm so stingy that paying for something I can unlock by paying more seems like a waste, and because in most F2P-games which I have tried have lost their charm before I get to the point I'd be willing to pay money to advance (HoDA, I'm looking at you).

 

But anyway, extra content, DLC and MT's make money, so they continue to be made.

 

(And let's not forget that EA and its affiliated studios have money to make new games because DLCs and TS keeps making them money.)

[AlanC9]

It isn't butthurt. It's normal. Just consumers clashing with corporate practices. Few people like underhanded stuff like this, when it comes to money.

At the very least, they need to find a way to be more shady about their practices. This is just blatant and transparent. If you're going to be a dick, cover your tracks better.

What's underhanded about it? If anything it's underhanded to hold stuff back from the disc if it could have gone on the disc. And rude to the poor bastards with download caps.

Of course, as someone who thinks that discs are nothing more than an obsolete way to move games to your system, I'm probably not going to ever understand the feelings here.