454 réponses à ce sujet

[chubert]

Ecael wrote...

I think I'm going to have to repeatedly quote myself in every post since there are people on both sides of the spectrum that either:

1. Didn't read the previous posts but posted their opinion anyway

or

2. Are being rather extremist in their views

Shepard: Hey everyone, this DLC discriminates against the poor!

In all seriousness, I don't think people seem to realize that the intention of free DLC is to add in the content that had to be cut to make a specific deadline.

This is a good thing -- Mass Effect 2 releases faster (instead of waiting an extra few months for the rest of the content) AND BioWare can finish the remaining content without having to throw it away.

Judging by the content that is in the game, this what they didn't finish in time:
-Normandy Crash Site
-Zaeed Massani
-Hammerhead/Firewalker (Vehicle controls are already in-game)
-Kasumi (Audio fully recorded, character and dossier already fleshed out)
-More weapons and armor

This is what they plan on releasing (that we know of) but hardly has any content in the game, and must be paid DLC:
-Liara-focused Shadow Broker DLC

Knowing this, the paid DLC should have started after Kasumi was released. Instead, the entire purpose of making this one DLC a paid one is to make this content seem like the trend for paid DLC. That way, people will go 'Hey, paid DLC is great too!' before BioWare releases something like Pinnacle Station or Return to Ostagar.

The true quality of post-release DLC will be seen after Kasumi is released.

Except for the day 1 DLC was probably finished with the game. When was the game finished? I believe I read somewhere it was finished around christmas time. The game was released late january. I seriously dont think they could finish up the day 1 DLC in 1 months time and release it when the game came out.

[NICKjnp]

The Angry One wrote...

Paid? What? What?

Paid content for something that's half-already in the game?
Screw you EA.

Don't you remember EA's original catch phrase... "EA Sports!  It's in the Game!"  So of course they will charge us for something already in the game.

[ChampDude]

The Angry One wrote...

ChampDude wrote...

I don't think the Hammerhead was ever an instrumental part of the Mass Effect experience, and regardless, it is free. Also, do you actually like Mass Effect 2 by any chance, or just part of your personality? In which case, your name is very fitting Angry One

How do you know? The void in the cargohold and leftover ghost pings where Hammerhead mission planets are probably located say otherwise.

How do you know it was? Maybe they knew they were going to release it as DLC later on and wanted to make sure the process will have been set up ahead of time, instead of changing pre-existing content within the game. I would imagine it would be a lot easier to build upon a foundation then to start from scratch. Also, I am downloading it for free and the day I start complaining about free downloads is the day I don't care about money (which will be never)

[Ecael]

Gingeraids wrote...

I think it's best to just ignore Angry One for the remainder of this topic. He/She/It is obviously not getting the idea that some people are okay with this, and I'm sure everyone's tired of his/her/its posts consisting of "You're thick headed. I'm right and you're wrong. Deal with it."

So yeah, just ignore Angry One for now.

Angry One does have a point though. She(he?) is right to say that this DLC specifically should have been free because at least half of the content is already in the game. However, I have no problem paying for DLC after this one is released.

Now this paid DLC seems like a ploy to make BioWare's paid DLC look good with their free DLC so that people will buy whatever they put up next, regardless of whether it's good or not (Pinnacle Station, Return to Ostagar).

[Ramikadyc]

Beerfish wrote...


It's purely a consumer choice, be all means vote with your wallet and don't buy it if you perosnally think it's a rip off.

Now why on Earth would someone do that when they could log onto a message boards and try to force their "opinions" down people's throats? You're being pretty thick!

[stillnotking]

The Angry One wrote...

stillnotking wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Would you guys who would happily pay for this be equally satisfied in buying a car with no windshield, rear doors or passenger seats?
And hey, maybe the windshield and rear doors get sent to you a week later, for "free". You must be ecstatic now.
The passenger seats? You'll have to pay for those. $500 please. What? It's only a fraction of what you paid for the car! Quit complaining.

Nope.  I definitely would not buy a car that didn't have a windshield, rear doors or passenger seats.

ME2 was complete at release, I paid for it and am very happy with it.  I'm looking forward to the DLC, and based on BW's track record I am quite confident that it'll be worth the very small amount of money they'll be charging.

All this is another way of saying that your analogy is ridiculous and you have no grounds to complain.

No. ME2 was not complete at release. Several features like the Hammerhead are missing. "DLC" was available at the time of release.
The difference between a car and modern videogames is that people like you have been conditioned into thinking you're buying complete games when you really aren't. Do you honestly think the critically low variety of weapons and armour in the vanilla game is "complete"?
Think about it for a second. We're going to have to pay extra to get a grand total of 3 SMGs.

You know, accusing people of having been "conditioned" somehow is really never constructive or, for that matter, accurate.  I've been playing computer games for almost 25 years.  I know what I like, and I liked ME2.  If they'd never released a single piece of DLC for the game -- which is how it would have been in the old days -- I'd still love it and consider it worth every penny that I paid for it.

Luckily, this being 2010, they have the option of releasing additional content either free or for a nominal charge, and I have the option of paying for it.  That's a win-win situation for the consumer.  If, as other posters have mentioned, you don't think the DLC will be worth it, then don't buy it.  If you don't think the original game was worth it, then that's up to you as well -- either try to get your money back or just don't buy their games in the future.

Plain and simple, you're overthinking this.  Either the original game was worth the money, or it wasn't.  Either the DLC is worth the money, or it isn't.  That's all that matters.

[kraidy1117]

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]The Angry One wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

Where is your proof expect for Hammerhead and Kasumie? Thats right you have no proof that the other stuff was already in the game. If you don't want to pay, then don't no one is forcing you, I would like it to be free but it's not going to happen and to start complaining like a baby is not going to help.

[/quote]

Yeah it's not at all suspicious that Zaeed/Normandy crash site were available at release or anything.

[/quote]

How do you know that they where working on it before release date? You have no proof and yet you jump on the hating EA banwagon. I rather have EA own Bioware then anyother company >_>

[/quote]

EA? EA? *Blinks in disbelief* You would rather have EA than any other company?

Something tells me you don't regognize patterns. EA is one of the most profit focused publishers in the buisness, shown by their tendency to release a game with half the content cut so that they can sell it back to you and sucker twice as much money from you. Why the hell woud you want a dev to be owned by EA?

[/quote]

So you rather have M$ who would charge for everything, or Activision who is worse then EA, or would you rather have 2K own them and pull a Biosohck 2. Sorry EA might have done somethings that are not nice, but realy as of now they are the best company in the market.

[/quote]

I would rather have Microsoft, because while yes, they do charge you for everything, at least they don't charge you for things that they cut from the game so that they could sell them back to you for more profit, which is pretty much EAs SOP.

[/quote]

Wow, you cleary are young if you want M$ to have Bioware. M$ is more greedy then EA ever will be.

[/quote]

Oh, I never said they weren't greedy. Pretty much all publishers are nowadays. But the thing is, EA is the one that stands out from them all in it's complete disrespect for the developers it owns, as well as it's customers. Microsoft might be greedy, but at least they realize that the way to maintain a consumer base is to keep them happy.
[/quote]

Are we talking about the same EA. The EA now is alot better then it used to be. I love how people use Eas history. They are alot diffrent now. Ubisoft and Activiusion are more greddy then EA for crying outloud.

[/quote]

Different how?
They're doing the exact same thing. Look at The Sims 3. Hell, look at this very game.

And as for Actiblizzard and Ubisoft... do you have any actuall proof of how they are more greedy? Last I checked Actiblizzard was making such rediculous ammonuts of money off of MW2 and WOW that they don't even have to make more than one game a year anymore. And what's with Ubisoft being greedy? They're the least greedy of the bunch; their DLCs are usually the most fair priced.

[/quote]

Ypou got to be kidding me, do you follow video game news? Activision has killed the Call of Duty series after what they just did because the guys wanted to do something that Activsion did not like. Ubisoft not greedy? So you don't remember the prince of persia DLC crap or even AC2? I trhink you guys who hate EA so much need to look at other companys and be glad EA has Bioware, but nooooooooooo you guys have to act like you have a stick up your ass.

[/quote]

Ok, first off, why the hell would anyone be glad that EA, a company known for running it's developers into the ground, if not outright destroying them (remember pandemic?) and, as I have said time and time again, cuts out content from games just so that they can sell it back to them? Yeah, perfect company there.

Also you have no ground to defend EA at all. Every one of my aruments has been met with vauge responses like "The're alot different now" or attempts to paint them favorably against other compaines. And while I'll give you that you do have proof of why those compaines are greedy. You have not given one iota of proof that EA is the benevolent publisher that you say it is.
[/quote]

Pandemic was already falling to the ground way before EA even came into view. The only good games they made where those star wars ones, thats it.Also if EA is so bad then why has Bioware made two fantastic games when they are with EA? Explain that to me will you, bah sod it I am out of here. You guys can keep on complaining, but most likely you will buy this DLC.

[Ramikadyc]

Ecael wrote...

 at least half of the content is already in the game.

Could you define "half" please?

[Gingeraids]

The Angry One wrote...

Gingeraids wrote...

I think it's best to just ignore Angry One for the remainder of this topic. He/She/It is obviously not getting the idea that some people are okay with this, and I'm sure everyone's tired of his/her/its posts consisting of "You're thick headed. I'm right and you're wrong. Deal with it."

So yeah, just ignore Angry One for now.

No, I call people thick when they outright flame me for disagreeing with the notion that this is BioWare being generous and not EA being moneygrubbing bastards.
Oh but please continue to spread misinformation about me if my opinion scares you that much.

There's a difference between 'I'm disagreeing with you' and 'My opinion is scary because it's true! You're thick headed for not listening to me!

This would be a disagreement post. "Well, I would rather not pay for this DLC, but hey go waste your money if you want to."

Your posts are "You're thick headed. EA is obviously an evil company hell-bent on ripping everyone off. They want to throw Bioware into the ground and spit on our faces for charging us! Why do you disagree with me when you know I'm right?"

You've given little evidence (outside of the already known fact that Kasumi had a placeholder, and a dossier with audio for the final mission) to support your claims. I suggest you stop pretending to be so superior to everyone who disagrees with you.

Your opinions are not fact. Deal with it.

[Homebound]

Then when we buy Kasumi, we find out her character is as flat and static as the dialogue option with Zaeed.



I bet she'll mention how she wants to steal Ramen or something because she's such a dynamic person. -__-

[Ecael]

chubert wrote...

Ecael wrote...

I think I'm going to have to repeatedly quote myself in every post since there are people on both sides of the spectrum that either:

1. Didn't read the previous posts but posted their opinion anyway

or

2. Are being rather extremist in their views

Shepard: Hey everyone, this DLC discriminates against the poor!

In all seriousness, I don't think people seem to realize that the intention of free DLC is to add in the content that had to be cut to make a specific deadline.

This is a good thing -- Mass Effect 2 releases faster (instead of waiting an extra few months for the rest of the content) AND BioWare can finish the remaining content without having to throw it away.

Judging by the content that is in the game, this what they didn't finish in time:
-Normandy Crash Site
-Zaeed Massani
-Hammerhead/Firewalker (Vehicle controls are already in-game)
-Kasumi (Audio fully recorded, character and dossier already fleshed out)
-More weapons and armor

This is what they plan on releasing (that we know of) but hardly has any content in the game, and must be paid DLC:
-Liara-focused Shadow Broker DLC

Knowing this, the paid DLC should have started after Kasumi was released. Instead, the entire purpose of making this one DLC a paid one is to make this content seem like the trend for paid DLC. That way, people will go 'Hey, paid DLC is great too!' before BioWare releases something like Pinnacle Station or Return to Ostagar.

The true quality of post-release DLC will be seen after Kasumi is released.

Except for the day 1 DLC was probably finished with the game. When was the game finished? I believe I read somewhere it was finished around christmas time. The game was released late january. I seriously dont think they could finish up the day 1 DLC in 1 months time and release it when the game came out.

It could have been in the stage of beta testing at that point. Or, it was left somewhat unfinished until after the Christmas break.

Sure, they could be holding back content purposefully, but one has to consider that doing so allows BioWare to spread out their schedule so they can polish the game for release, and once it goes gold they can start working on the DLC (before the game comes out).

[Onyx Jaguar]

Ramikadyc wrote...

Ecael wrote...

 at least half of the content is already in the game.

Could you define "half" please?

For one thing VA takes up quite a bit of space, just throwing that out there.  They can explain it better than I however.

[Wild Still]

The odd bit about all of this is that if Bioware had purged any and all evidence of Kasumi from the DvDs I already paid for I would more than happily pay for the DLC. Even knowing it had been under development as another part of the original release, it's the idea that I already bought most of this content on the DvDs I have sitting next to me right now. To me this is no better than selling someone a car and welding the trunk closed unless they agree to pay a "trunk opening fee".



I don't have any issue with paying for DLC it's the unbelievable gall to put a damned digital salesman in Dragon Age to hock Warden's Keep that kept me away from my credit card. It's not whether the DLC is worth money or not, it is absolutely worth money. It's the optics of charging for the Stone Prisoner and Kasumi style DLC that isn't really DLC, it was already there.



Then we can get started on having to buy a package of, say 480 Bioware points so you can buy a program for 350 points. This virtual currency policy is a way to guarantee you can always overcharge a customer for services you never rendered.



P.S. Know your local laws, MS points and Bioware points are perilously close to gift certificates, and legal arguments are being made to force companies offering "virtual currency" to abide by laws that govern these items.

[ifander]

stillnotking wrote...

...

Plain and simple, you're overthinking this.  Either the original game was worth the money, or it wasn't.  Either the DLC is worth the money, or it isn't.  That's all that matters.

This.

[Sleepicub09]

Ecael wrote...

chubert wrote...

Ecael wrote...

I think I'm going to have to repeatedly quote myself in every post since there are people on both sides of the spectrum that either:

1. Didn't read the previous posts but posted their opinion anyway

or

2. Are being rather extremist in their views

Shepard: Hey everyone, this DLC discriminates against the poor!

In all seriousness, I don't think people seem to realize that the intention of free DLC is to add in the content that had to be cut to make a specific deadline.

This is a good thing -- Mass Effect 2 releases faster (instead of waiting an extra few months for the rest of the content) AND BioWare can finish the remaining content without having to throw it away.

Judging by the content that is in the game, this what they didn't finish in time:
-Normandy Crash Site
-Zaeed Massani
-Hammerhead/Firewalker (Vehicle controls are already in-game)
-Kasumi (Audio fully recorded, character and dossier already fleshed out)
-More weapons and armor

This is what they plan on releasing (that we know of) but hardly has any content in the game, and must be paid DLC:
-Liara-focused Shadow Broker DLC

Knowing this, the paid DLC should have started after Kasumi was released. Instead, the entire purpose of making this one DLC a paid one is to make this content seem like the trend for paid DLC. That way, people will go 'Hey, paid DLC is great too!' before BioWare releases something like Pinnacle Station or Return to Ostagar.

The true quality of post-release DLC will be seen after Kasumi is released.

Except for the day 1 DLC was probably finished with the game. When was the game finished? I believe I read somewhere it was finished around christmas time. The game was released late january. I seriously dont think they could finish up the day 1 DLC in 1 months time and release it when the game came out.

It could have been in the stage of beta testing at that point. Or, it was left somewhat unfinished until after the Christmas break.

Sure, they could be holding back content purposefully, but one has to consider that doing so allows BioWare to spread out their schedule so they can polish the game for release, and once it goes gold they can start working on the DLC (before the game comes out).

actually the day 1 dlc was delayed a day so idk 

[wako58]

I'm currently on my 4th run through of the game. I guess its pretty clear that I enjoyed it. I fully intend to pay for and play the new content. In my view I don't believe I've missed out on anything in ME2. It was a complete game experience for me. To each his own I guess.



The future of paid dlc for any company, not just bioware, is dependent on the quality of that content. If the content is good people will buy it. If its not it will fail on its own. The market has a tendency to correct this things.

[cachx]

ifander wrote...

stillnotking wrote...

...

Plain and simple, you're overthinking this.  Either the original game was worth the money, or it wasn't.  Either the DLC is worth the money, or it isn't.  That's all that matters.

This.

I support this as well.

[Ecael]

Ramikadyc wrote...

Ecael wrote...

 at least half of the content is already in the game.

Could you define "half" please?

After playing Return to Ostagar from Dragon Age, I'd say at least half of the content is the textures and all the dialogue that is already found in the game.

I'm quite certain that all her dialogue is in the game - jj0ck33 on YouTube is now including Kasumi dialogue with his 'All squadmate hidden dialogue' videos, AND her voice actress is the same as the News Reporter on the Citadel. However, I'm not sure about the textures - but you can bet it will look something like another mission.

Wild Still put it in a different context (although I hate car analogies):

The odd bit about all of this is that if Bioware had purged any and all
evidence of Kasumi from the DvDs I already paid for I would more than
happily pay for the DLC. Even knowing it had been under development as
another part of the original release, it's the idea that I already
bought most of this content on the DvDs I have sitting next to me right
now. To me this is no better than selling someone a car and welding the
trunk closed unless they agree to pay a "trunk opening fee".

[KillaKow]

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

[quote]The Angry One wrote...

[quote]kraidy1117 wrote...

Where is your proof expect for Hammerhead and Kasumie? Thats right you have no proof that the other stuff was already in the game. If you don't want to pay, then don't no one is forcing you, I would like it to be free but it's not going to happen and to start complaining like a baby is not going to help.

[/quote]

Yeah it's not at all suspicious that Zaeed/Normandy crash site were available at release or anything.

[/quote]

How do you know that they where working on it before release date? You have no proof and yet you jump on the hating EA banwagon. I rather have EA own Bioware then anyother company >_>

[/quote]

EA? EA? *Blinks in disbelief* You would rather have EA than any other company?

Something tells me you don't regognize patterns. EA is one of the most profit focused publishers in the buisness, shown by their tendency to release a game with half the content cut so that they can sell it back to you and sucker twice as much money from you. Why the hell woud you want a dev to be owned by EA?

[/quote]

So you rather have M$ who would charge for everything, or Activision who is worse then EA, or would you rather have 2K own them and pull a Biosohck 2. Sorry EA might have done somethings that are not nice, but realy as of now they are the best company in the market.

[/quote]

I would rather have Microsoft, because while yes, they do charge you for everything, at least they don't charge you for things that they cut from the game so that they could sell them back to you for more profit, which is pretty much EAs SOP.

[/quote]

Wow, you cleary are young if you want M$ to have Bioware. M$ is more greedy then EA ever will be.

[/quote]

Oh, I never said they weren't greedy. Pretty much all publishers are nowadays. But the thing is, EA is the one that stands out from them all in it's complete disrespect for the developers it owns, as well as it's customers. Microsoft might be greedy, but at least they realize that the way to maintain a consumer base is to keep them happy.
[/quote]

Are we talking about the same EA. The EA now is alot better then it used to be. I love how people use Eas history. They are alot diffrent now. Ubisoft and Activiusion are more greddy then EA for crying outloud.

[/quote]

Different how?
They're doing the exact same thing. Look at The Sims 3. Hell, look at this very game.

And as for Actiblizzard and Ubisoft... do you have any actuall proof of how they are more greedy? Last I checked Actiblizzard was making such rediculous ammonuts of money off of MW2 and WOW that they don't even have to make more than one game a year anymore. And what's with Ubisoft being greedy? They're the least greedy of the bunch; their DLCs are usually the most fair priced.

[/quote]

Ypou got to be kidding me, do you follow video game news? Activision has killed the Call of Duty series after what they just did because the guys wanted to do something that Activsion did not like. Ubisoft not greedy? So you don't remember the prince of persia DLC crap or even AC2? I trhink you guys who hate EA so much need to look at other companys and be glad EA has Bioware, but nooooooooooo you guys have to act like you have a stick up your ass.

[/quote]

Ok, first off, why the hell would anyone be glad that EA, a company known for running it's developers into the ground, if not outright destroying them (remember pandemic?) and, as I have said time and time again, cuts out content from games just so that they can sell it back to them? Yeah, perfect company there.

Also you have no ground to defend EA at all. Every one of my aruments has been met with vauge responses like "The're alot different now" or attempts to paint them favorably against other compaines. And while I'll give you that you do have proof of why those compaines are greedy. You have not given one iota of proof that EA is the benevolent publisher that you say it is.
[/quote]

Pandemic was already falling to the ground way before EA even came into view. The only good games they made where those star wars ones, thats it.Also if EA is so bad then why has Bioware made two fantastic games when they are with EA? Explain that to me will you, bah sod it I am out of here. You guys can keep on complaining, but most likely you will buy this DLC.

[/quote]

What? Have you ever heard of a game called Mercenaries? That was one of Pandemic's best games. And EA's polices have no influences on the skills of thier developers. Bioware can make fantastic games becasue they are a good developer, EA has nothing to do with it. What EA is doing, for the fifty billionth time, is cutting content out of thier games and then re selling it to the consumer. And yes, I will by this DLC, because I want to enjoy the full Mass Effect 2 experince, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with EA's buisness practices.

And yes, please do leave. This topic will be far more civil without your staggering ignorace.
And it lets me get the last word.

[Gingeraids]

cachx wrote...

ifander wrote...

stillnotking wrote...

...

Plain and simple, you're overthinking this.  Either the original game was worth the money, or it wasn't.  Either the DLC is worth the money, or it isn't.  That's all that matters.

This.

I support this as well.

I make the quote pyramid longer by supporting this.

[wako58]

ifander wrote...

stillnotking wrote...

...

Plain and simple, you're overthinking this.  Either the original game was worth the money, or it wasn't.  Either the DLC is worth the money, or it isn't.  That's all that matters.

This.

QFT

[chubert]

Ecael wrote...

chubert wrote...

Ecael wrote...

I think I'm going to have to repeatedly quote myself in every post since there are people on both sides of the spectrum that either:

1. Didn't read the previous posts but posted their opinion anyway

or

2. Are being rather extremist in their views

Shepard: Hey everyone, this DLC discriminates against the poor!

In all seriousness, I don't think people seem to realize that the intention of free DLC is to add in the content that had to be cut to make a specific deadline.

This is a good thing -- Mass Effect 2 releases faster (instead of waiting an extra few months for the rest of the content) AND BioWare can finish the remaining content without having to throw it away.

Judging by the content that is in the game, this what they didn't finish in time:
-Normandy Crash Site
-Zaeed Massani
-Hammerhead/Firewalker (Vehicle controls are already in-game)
-Kasumi (Audio fully recorded, character and dossier already fleshed out)
-More weapons and armor

This is what they plan on releasing (that we know of) but hardly has any content in the game, and must be paid DLC:
-Liara-focused Shadow Broker DLC

Knowing this, the paid DLC should have started after Kasumi was released. Instead, the entire purpose of making this one DLC a paid one is to make this content seem like the trend for paid DLC. That way, people will go 'Hey, paid DLC is great too!' before BioWare releases something like Pinnacle Station or Return to Ostagar.

The true quality of post-release DLC will be seen after Kasumi is released.

Except for the day 1 DLC was probably finished with the game. When was the game finished? I believe I read somewhere it was finished around christmas time. The game was released late january. I seriously dont think they could finish up the day 1 DLC in 1 months time and release it when the game came out.

It could have been in the stage of beta testing at that point. Or, it was left somewhat unfinished until after the Christmas break.

Sure, they could be holding back content purposefully, but one has to consider that doing so allows BioWare to spread out their schedule so they can polish the game for release, and once it goes gold they can start working on the DLC (before the game comes out).

Thats 1 possibility. But since bioware is a business and out to make money, I tend to believe that the Day 1 DLC was done before the game went retail and they purposly left it as DLC to get some money from used game sales. I really dont mind DLC. I just want a finished game. No one forces them to release a game early. They do that so they can recoup the cost of the game.

The consumers suffer. This game is glitchy at times. Granted not as bad as some other games but my point is that It will probably never be fixed. How about fix the game before DLC?

Plain and simple, they are a business out for money.

[JeanLuc761]

ifander wrote...

stillnotking wrote...

...

Plain and simple, you're overthinking this.  Either the original game was worth the money, or it wasn't.  Either the DLC is worth the money, or it isn't.  That's all that matters.

This.

I approve as well.  Mass Effect 2 was a complete experience and I enjoyed it very much.  Any extras I get are just a bonus

[Kaiser Shepard]

Sleepicub09 wrote...

Ecael wrote...

chubert wrote...

Ecael wrote...

I think I'm going to have to repeatedly quote myself in every post since there are people on both sides of the spectrum that either:

1. Didn't read the previous posts but posted their opinion anyway

or

2. Are being rather extremist in their views

Shepard: Hey everyone, this DLC discriminates against the poor!

In all seriousness, I don't think people seem to realize that the intention of free DLC is to add in the content that had to be cut to make a specific deadline.

This is a good thing -- Mass Effect 2 releases faster (instead of waiting an extra few months for the rest of the content) AND BioWare can finish the remaining content without having to throw it away.

Judging by the content that is in the game, this what they didn't finish in time:
-Normandy Crash Site
-Zaeed Massani
-Hammerhead/Firewalker (Vehicle controls are already in-game)
-Kasumi (Audio fully recorded, character and dossier already fleshed out)
-More weapons and armor

This is what they plan on releasing (that we know of) but hardly has any content in the game, and must be paid DLC:
-Liara-focused Shadow Broker DLC

Knowing this, the paid DLC should have started after Kasumi was released. Instead, the entire purpose of making this one DLC a paid one is to make this content seem like the trend for paid DLC. That way, people will go 'Hey, paid DLC is great too!' before BioWare releases something like Pinnacle Station or Return to Ostagar.

The true quality of post-release DLC will be seen after Kasumi is released.

Except for the day 1 DLC was probably finished with the game. When was the game finished? I believe I read somewhere it was finished around christmas time. The game was released late january. I seriously dont think they could finish up the day 1 DLC in 1 months time and release it when the game came out.

It could have been in the stage of beta testing at that point. Or, it was left somewhat unfinished until after the Christmas break.

Sure, they could be holding back content purposefully, but one has to consider that doing so allows BioWare to spread out their schedule so they can polish the game for release, and once it goes gold they can start working on the DLC (before the game comes out).

actually the day 1 dlc was delayed a day so idk 

Most likely due to the system Xbox Live uses. BioWare didn't actually make or finish all that content on 26-27 january.

I have no trouble with that though, nor do I really with this. I will buy Kasumi, no matter what. It's just lame-ish taht they do it this way with something that was supposed to be or planned to be in the game itself.

[Sleepicub09]

Gingeraids wrote...

cachx wrote...

ifander wrote...

stillnotking wrote...

...

Plain and simple, you're overthinking this.  Either the original game was worth the money, or it wasn't.  Either the DLC is worth the money, or it isn't.  That's all that matters.

This.

I support this as well.

I make the quote pyramid longer by supporting this.

ahh some common sense finally