382 réponses à ce sujet

[Adanu]

People who obsess about length are the people who gave us the ridiculous MW2 campaigns. Mask of the Betrayer was not that long, but it was a *great* game for what it was.



The only real question anyone should ask is if the game is fun. If it isn't, don't play it.

[Wishpig]

Adanu wrote...

The only real question anyone should ask is if the game is fun. If it isn't, don't play it.

So companies should start pricing games on how "fun" they predict their gonna be. Great idea. I don't see that ending badly.

[Posioned]

Offkorn wrote...

Posioned wrote...

I really don't see the big deal over $40 for a exp. I've paid that for many games I play. It's standard for me.

You normally pay $40 for an expansion? I find that hard to believe since this is the first expansion to cost that much.

Indeed I've paid that for exspansions for other games. But I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything here.

[Wishpig]

Posioned wrote...

Offkorn wrote...

Posioned wrote...

I really don't see the big deal over $40 for a exp. I've paid that for many games I play. It's standard for me.

You normally pay $40 for an expansion? I find that hard to believe since this is the first expansion to cost that much.

Indeed I've paid that for exspansions for other games. But I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything here.

Really? Cause I never have... and I own a ton of expansions. Well... not a ton. At least 15 though.

[Posioned]

Wishpig wrote...

Posioned wrote...

Offkorn wrote...

Posioned wrote...

I really don't see the big deal over $40 for a exp. I've paid that for many games I play. It's standard for me.

You normally pay $40 for an expansion? I find that hard to believe since this is the first expansion to cost that much.

Indeed I've paid that for exspansions for other games. But I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything here.

Really? Cause I never have... and I own a ton of expansions. Well... not a ton. At least 15 though.

I'm not talking specificallyof just RPG's here. I was just saying that I've always paid $40 for exp for games I've played so I have never seen the big deal about it. That's all.

[Wishpig]

Posioned wrote...

Wishpig wrote...

Posioned wrote...

Offkorn wrote...

Posioned wrote...

I really don't see the big deal over $40 for a exp. I've paid that for many games I play. It's standard for me.

You normally pay $40 for an expansion? I find that hard to believe since this is the first expansion to cost that much.

Indeed I've paid that for exspansions for other games. But I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything here.

Really? Cause I never have... and I own a ton of expansions. Well... not a ton. At least 15 though.

I'm not talking specificallyof just RPG's here. I was just saying that I've always paid $40 for exp for games I've played so I have never seen the big deal about it. That's all.

Really? I've gotten expansions for RTS's, RPG's, FPS's, and... well... ok I guess thats it but none have cost me $40. All ranged from 20-30.

[Posioned]

Wishpig wrote...

Posioned wrote...

Wishpig wrote...

Posioned wrote...

Offkorn wrote...

Posioned wrote...

I really don't see the big deal over $40 for a exp. I've paid that for many games I play. It's standard for me.

You normally pay $40 for an expansion? I find that hard to believe since this is the first expansion to cost that much.

Indeed I've paid that for exspansions for other games. But I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything here.

Really? Cause I never have... and I own a ton of expansions. Well... not a ton. At least 15 though.

I'm not talking specificallyof just RPG's here. I was just saying that I've always paid $40 for exp for games I've played so I have never seen the big deal about it. That's all.

Really? I've gotten expansions for RTS's, RPG's, FPS's, and... well... ok I guess thats it but none have cost me $40. All ranged from 20-30.

I'm in Canada. Maybe that plays a part in it? I know I've seen my share of $29.99 turn into a $39.99 price tag here.

[Ibby1kanobi]

Ferret A Baudoin wrote...

I'm honestly a little puzzled by some folks obsession with game length. What seems more important are: Did I have a ripping good time? Did it tell a tell a gripping tale that I got lost in? I hope the answers for Awakening will be "yes" to both. And game length is a bloody tough thing to gauge - some folks can finish Origins in 24 hours and some 240 hours. That's a factor of 10 difference.

Plan on having a good time and a chance to get lost in Ferelden again. Your gameplay length mileage will vary.

The problem is, with all due respect, is that were being charged $40 (almost as much as the original game), and I would like to make sure the DLC is worth that money (and yes, a BIG part of worth is length, and the other is quality). If this was another 5 or 10 dollar DLC, then I wouldn't care. But $40? It had better be a very expansive DLC.

[TheMadCat]

Really? I've gotten expansions for RTS's, RPG's, FPS's, and... well... ok I guess thats it but none have cost me $40. All ranged from 20-30.

You haven't bought that many expansion packs then. The $40 tag has been quite common the last few years.

[flem1]

dark-lauron wrote...

Stompi wrote...

I was surprised that the first expansion will be released only 4 month after the main game.
But "the biggest expansion we will be releasing" can really mean anything. Stone Prisoner's length isn't that hard to beat.

For a standard player, I am sure Stone Prisoner has a good 3-4 hours of gameplay.

Only if you count all the conversations you can have with Shale through the game.  The actual quest takes two hours tops -- if you're going slowly.

(for reference:  the entire game took me 86 hours)

Modifié par flem1, 06 février 2010 - 12:51 .

[Wishpig]

TheMadCat wrote...

Really? I've gotten expansions for RTS's, RPG's, FPS's, and... well... ok I guess thats it but none have cost me $40. All ranged from 20-30.

You haven't bought that many expansion packs then. The $40 tag has been quite common the last few years.

Well drop some examples then (NOT including mmo's. Like WoW or not, it's expansions had far far far more then 15 hours worth of content) also not including Sims, which I think is the reason behind the $40 price tag... EA got away with that and it's gonna pave the way.


Now my memory doesn't serve me 100%... but if I recall the expansions to fallout 3 and oblivion weren't $40. I know no total war expansion cost $40. Warcraft 3, Battle for middle earth rise of the litch, sins of a solar empire (both x-packs together) all 30 or below, CIV IV expansions + Galactic Civ expansions = $30, the Witcher mega pack cost nothing (guantee they could of gotten away with charging up to $15), if I recall niether NwN2 expansions were $40, Half-Life 2 x-pack collection $30 on PC, those are off the top of my head.

I see theres diffrence in prices depending on the country... so maybe to you guys this isn't a big deal and therefor I get you.

But I can't think of one none mmo or sims x-pack that is $40. I'm sure theres an example... but it certainly does not seem common place.

[tinman0925]

They're going to get my 40 bucks no matter what . Between the game and the books I love this game and can't wait for more. When I die instead of going to heaven I'd like to go to Dragon age

[MassFrost]

flem1 wrote...

Ferret A Baudoin wrote...

I'm honestly a little puzzled by some folks obsession with game length. What seems more important are: Did I have a ripping good time? Did it tell a tell a gripping tale that I got lost in? I hope the answers for Awakening will be "yes" to both. And game length is a bloody tough thing to gauge - some folks can finish Origins in 24 hours and some 240 hours. That's a factor of 10 difference.

Plan on having a good time and a chance to get lost in Ferelden again. Your gameplay length mileage will vary.

Translation:  it's short.

That's pretty much what I read as well. And honestly, 240 hours to complete DA:O? Maybe if you left the game running for a few days, and even then it'd be a stretch.

I'll be paying the $40 for this expansion regardless, and I have very high hopes, but it'll definitely be a way of gauging whether or not I shell out more money for DA content in the future.

[Wishpig]

tinman0925 wrote...
When I die instead of going to heaven I'd like to go to Dragon age

Really? I would go to a land of singing candy and pink + yellow trees that smile and tell me how pretty I look... a land were it rains wawa hoagies and my poop morphs into humanoid slaves that fight each other for my amusement.

Your heaven is depressing and uncreative.

[Peeker2009]

A question: When the developers and/or players talk about game length, how are codexes factored in? The reason I ask is that (being a touch skeptical perhaps), I wonder if they have become a new way to lengthen game time with far less effort needed for development.

I'm not suggesting the codexes are no good, or that they write themselves, and I know many players are absolutely smitten with the lore/background of Dragon Age (more than I am, I admit). However, after participating in this forum for awhile now, I am pretty sure that there are a lot of players out there who would actually prefer more codexes/books to read than more battles/side- quests etc. I'm not one of them btw.

Personally, I would prefer to get a book of lore with my game that I could read in bed after I turned the game off, but that's just me.

Any ideas on this?

Also, perhaps related to this is the xp u get from codexes, chests and traps (as well as quest xp rewards), and how that might relate to the number of levels potentially gained in the expansion. It seems to me that it would be quite possible to increase the number of levels by including more of these devices and/or increasing the xp value from them. Sure, games have always used these devices, but is the balance shifting?

I would hope (and trust) that Bioware developers don't think like this, but who can say what happens when a huge company like EA puts the squeeze on, and it starts to look harder and harder to fulfill promises and expectations?

Anyway just expressing my concern and would like to know what others think about it

Modifié par Peeker2009, 06 février 2010 - 02:50 .

[JKJEDIKNIGHT]

Ferret A Baudoin wrote...

I'm honestly a little puzzled by some folks obsession with game length. What seems more important are: Did I have a ripping good time? Did it tell a tell a gripping tale that I got lost in? I hope the answers for Awakening will be "yes" to both. And game length is a bloody tough thing to gauge - some folks can finish Origins in 24 hours and some 240 hours. That's a factor of 10 difference.

Plan on having a good time and a chance to get lost in Ferelden again. Your gameplay length mileage will vary.

Agreed.  Story and fun are most important to me.  Yes, I like a game that keeps me in it for a LONG time, but time lengths vary for everyone.  I beat DAO in like 17 hours on one game, and on another over 40.  It's all in what you do in the game.  Another prime example would be Final Fantasy X.  I logged over 130 hours on that game.  Did any of you come even close to that?

[Kalfear]

flem1 wrote...

dark-lauron wrote...

Stompi wrote...

I was surprised that the first expansion will be released only 4 month after the main game.
But "the biggest expansion we will be releasing" can really mean anything. Stone Prisoner's length isn't that hard to beat.

For a standard player, I am sure Stone Prisoner has a good 3-4 hours of gameplay.

Only if you count all the conversations you can have with Shale through the game.  The actual quest takes two hours tops -- if you're going slowly.

(for reference:  the entire game took me 86 hours)

Of course you count conversation, thats apart of the DLC after all!

Stone Prisoner was a good DLC, Wardens Keep was a terrible DLC, havent tried RTO yet

Game play, Lore, Conversation, all make up the DLC to judge length on.
In a perfect world you should be getting 1 hour of content for every dollar you spend.
If the DLC $5.00, you should get 5 hours
If the expansion $40.00, you should get 40 hours

DA:O its self delivered on this for most people. (im canadian) $80.00 for game, 60-90 hours of game play. Almost perfect balance.

Game took me 65 hours to play but I skipped reading the codex entries because they hurt my eyes to read so figure I lost 10 hours of content by skipping it all. Do wish they did like ME1 and 2 with a narrative reading the codex entries for you. So my final time should have been in area of 75 hours. As I said, almost perfect balance between price and content.

Modifié par Kalfear, 06 février 2010 - 03:51 .

[DragonDefender]

Gme length is a good question, how long will I have to submerge myself into this story. Will it give me my monies worth or am i paying almost full retail price for something that is half as long as the original. I have already pre-ordered my copy but if it does not live up to expectations then most people will not bother to buy the next installment except maybe the hardcore Bioware supporters.



This is all conjucture and oppion on my part.

[TheMadCat]

Wishpig wrote...

Well drop some examples then (NOT including mmo's. Like WoW or not,
it's expansions had far far far more then 15 hours worth of content)
also not including Sims, which I think is the reason behind the $40
price tag... EA got away with that and it's gonna pave the way.

STALKER Clear Sky and STALKER Call of Priypat, Supreme Commander Forged Alliance, the ArmA 2 expansion coming out, Napoleon: Total War, Kings Bounty: Armored Princess, Crysis Warhead (Not positive on that), SWAT 4 The Stetchkov Incident, X3: Terran Conflict (That's a tough one to call an expansion though), a few more in my head that I'm not positive about. This is just a quick list I remember from another debate on this forum, I could probrably dig up a few more if you'd like.

[Wishpig]

TheMadCat wrote...

Wishpig wrote...

Well drop some examples then (NOT including mmo's. Like WoW or not,
it's expansions had far far far more then 15 hours worth of content)
also not including Sims, which I think is the reason behind the $40
price tag... EA got away with that and it's gonna pave the way.

STALKER Clear Sky and STALKER Call of Priypat, Supreme Commander Forged Alliance, the ArmA 2 expansion coming out, Napoleon: Total War, Kings Bounty: Armored Princess, Crysis Warhead (Not positive on that), SWAT 4 The Stetchkov Incident, X3: Terran Conflict (That's a tough one to call an expansion though), a few more in my head that I'm not positive about. This is just a quick list I remember from another debate on this forum, I could probrably dig up a few more if you'd like.

Napolean: Total War isn't an expansion... it's actually another whole game in the Total War franchise. Like medieval warfare to empire.

King's Bounty: Armored Princess is it's own full game. Not quite an expansion not quite a sequal. Reguardless it's stand alone.

Supreme Commander is ALSO a stand alone game... meaning you don't need Supreme Commander to play.

Crysis Warhead is a stand alone game as well...

SHOCKER... so are both Stalker games

I can't find s*** on Swat 4 X-pak... but after finding out every single game you listed was a stand-alone game, I'm not sure theres any point... for the hell of it we'll say your 1 for 6.

Almost every one of the games you listed (possibly all of them) are STAND ALONES. Meaning they are in a sense their own games.

Say when they were deciding the price of Dragon Age: Origins on the PC they decided to ignore the diffrence between PC and Console pricing... raising the PC price to $60. Then they decided to raise the price another $10 dollars... bringing Dragon Age: Origins to $70. THAT IS WHAT IT'S LIKE. Bottom line. Only diffrence is this is an expansion, and expansions are a little fuzzy in their pricing... so they can easily get away with it, however, as is evident... some people have noticed their sneaky tactics.

Modifié par Wishpig, 06 février 2010 - 04:46 .

[TheMadCat]

You know the developers all call them stand alone expansions which isn't all that different from an expansion like Awakening which requires the original game. They just repackage the files rather then calling on them from an original source. It's actually a cool little ploy they pull to up the price a bit.

[Wishpig]

TheMadCat wrote...

You know the developers all call them stand alone expansions which isn't all that different from an expansion like Awakening which requires the original game. They just repackage the files rather then calling on them from an original source. It's actually a cool little ploy they pull to up the price a bit.

No it's not the same at all. I mean... I think it's obvious it's a very very diffrent thing... they are there OWN games.

Dragon Age: Awakaning requires you to spend $90 dollars. The games you listed require you to spend $40. You CAN spend $90, but you don't have to. Simple, but night and day.

Modifié par Wishpig, 06 février 2010 - 05:08 .

[TheMadCat]

Bit of a stretch don't you think? It's not like they tell you there is going to be a standalone expansion coming soon when the initial game is released, hell you're lucky if you even get an announcement within a year. So I mean is not telling your customers and letting them buy the original and then a year or so later flip them a stand alone expansion really any different then Awakening's situation? Sure if you waited a year and some before picking up the game than it's beneficial I guess, though in a year you'd probably be able to pick DA:O up for $20 or so. I don't know, different crap from the same dog to me.

And of course there are the games like Total War, Supreme Commander, Kings Bounty, STALKER and Crysis which simply do a new campaign, so if you want to do both campaigns you need to buy both versions anyways. Is there really a difference here?

Modifié par TheMadCat, 06 février 2010 - 05:11 .

[Wishpig]

TheMadCat wrote...

Bit of a stretch don't you think? It's not like they tell you there is going to be a standalone expansion coming soon when the initial game is released, hell you're lucky if you even get an announcement within a year. So I mean is not telling your customers and letting them buy the original and then a year or so later flip them a stand alone expansion really any different then Awakening's situation? Sure if you waited a year and some before picking up the game than it's beneficial I guess, though in a year you'd probably be able to pick DA:O up for $20 or so. I don't know, different crap from the same dog to me.

Right now, you are trying to justify why Awakaning's price (an expansion estimated to be around 1/5 the length of the full game which may or may not vary allot), by comparing it to a technically full game. A complete game. Do you not see the flaw in this argument?

It should also not be ignored, that a number of these stand-alone expansions come with benefits or an all out cheaper price to people who bought the first game. Take Super Street Fighter IV for example.

I've said it before, those defending the price, defend it buy often saying, "if it's a good game, the price is fair." That is an argument based mainly on opinion, and has no founding, no solid ground. I have provided example after example after example.Yes my argument is composed somewhat of opinion, but it is at least equally composed of fact. That is something that should not be ignored.

PS- Hope your not taking this as harsh, I don't mean to be, just a friendly debait.

Modifié par Wishpig, 06 février 2010 - 05:25 .

[TheMadCat]

Wishpig wrote...


Right now, you are trying to justify why Awakaning's price (an expansion estimated to be around 1/5 the length of the full game which may or may not vary allot), by comparing it to a full game. Do you not see the flaw in this argument?

I am? I thought I was arguing the differences, or lack thereof, between stand alone and traditional expansions. Let me look back and double check. Yeah, done nothing but compared stand alones and traditionals. And please, PLEASE, PLEASE, do not drag me into another "comparative value" argument, I have wasted enough of my life on this forum debating those stupid arguments.

PS- Hope your not taking this as harsh, I don't mean to be, just a friendly debait.

I've got some of the thickest skin you'll ever see. So unless you act completely stupid, which thankfully you haven't (A MIRACLE ON THE INTERNET), then no you won't rile me up or whatever.

That is an argument based mainly on opinion, and has no founding, no solid ground.

Quality is subjective, value is subjective, the "value" of a dollar is subjective. Your argument that it's not a fair price is as much an opinion as one who says it is worth the price. If I decide that a 20 hour expansion made by Bioware with a $40 tag is a fair price then by God it's a fair price to me. If you think it's a total ripoff then to you it's a total ripoff. But there are no real facts, there is no right or wrong price, everything is worth what an individual is willing to pay and evey individual is different. If they undershot it then it's a bit of a loss and correct it for next time, if they overshot it then they reduce the price. But one who is willing to buy the game for $40 is no more right or wrong then one who is not.

Modifié par TheMadCat, 06 février 2010 - 05:31 .