77 réponses à ce sujet

[Ubertax]

Haexpane wrote...

Ubertax wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

TJSolo wrote...
 

Short answer, you don't know why so instead you get on your soapbox to promote EA Biowares choice.

Comparing FONV to KOTOR2..."you know FONV will feel like an expansion, only longer" Complete donkey bull as FONV has no connection with the main character from FO3, as already stated from Beth.

Having a connection to the prior games main character is one very important feature of expansions, in most cases you are the main character from the previous game. You and Bioware are seemingly getting looser and looser with the term expansion.

Besides let's stay on point with the topic and stop trying to go off on badly conceived tangents.  Assuming DAOA used the same development and resources of DAO. Awakenings seems on the tad expensive side, even more so if you get a digital copy which will cost the same as retail copy.
The people that have a good price on it would be in the UK where it runs, 15 quid which is about $20. If you can get the game for $20-25 new or used that would be a fair deal.

FONV runso n FO3 engine modified
KOTOR 2 runs on KOTOR 1 engine modified
Both are developed by OBSIDIAN

KOTOR 2 and FONV are FULL PRICED

DAOA runs on DAO engine modified
DAO A is DISCOUNTED PRICE

Is your arguement that if a game uses the same engine they are just expansions? For example GOW2, under your system, is just an expansion to GOW? Or is anything produced using the Unreal Engine an expansion of the games that came before it using the Unreal Engine? 

No, that is a nice try at straw manning.

My argument is unchanged.

Name another single player game for the PS360 that launched at $40 and had 25 hours of single player.  You cant.

The point about KOTOR II feeling like an expansion, and Fallout New Vegas feeling like an expansion is not a debate, it's a TRUISM.  Everyone who has played KOTOR II agrees, it's feels, looks, plays exactly like a really long expansion.

Every preview of FO NV says the same things, feels like it's going to be a really cool expansion.

KOTOR II and FO NV were both from Obsidian, both are FULL PRICED games.

DAOA follows the same idea,  looks, feels the same as the original, BUT has new stuff.  AND it's discounted.

Yet some of you are still complaining.   EA could have EASILY added in a deathmatch mode, stripped out 10 hours of single player, launched it at $60 w/ a Drew Brees sink free DLC and called it Dragon Age Origins II

It really isn't a straw man, I am taking your logic and applying it to another situation with the same formula and asking you if that is how you would apply it. I am not trying to refute what you said just trying to understand it. I am just trying to figure out how you think so we can agree on some common ground (Also if you want you could  PM and expain how you think it is a straw man and if you want include your answer to the question posed so we don't clutter up the forum, I thought it was a fair question and is right in line with your type of arguements)

Also I wouldn't call it a truism about KOTOR II or FO NV. I read a pretty recent preview of FO NV and just because it uses a modified FO engine, which is just a modified Oblivion engine, I don't think it is just an expansion based on what was said. Again feel free to PM me so we don't clutter this up anymore. Because I am certain not EVERYONE who has played KOTOR II has thought it was an expansion.....and you say I am using fallacies just by asking you questions...

Also can I only name a $40.00 game or can I still mention Deadly Premonition at $20.00 being around 25 hours in length, because I have named that twice now and you continue to ignore it?

Modifié par Ubertax, 05 mai 2010 - 05:29 .

[Unseen_Reaper]

Oh my gosh put some new paper around this thread light a match and burn it. Im tired of people crying about the price of a game read reviews before you just jump headlong into somthing. The only issue i had were bugs and DLC issues other then that its a good spin off of the original game with new kool charaters new sexy weapons and armor. Stop Crying over the price it makes me wana scream. I was happy i bought it still i dont see how this thread still lives.

[Haexpane]

Ubertax wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Ubertax wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

TJSolo wrote...
 

Short answer, you don't know why so instead you get on your soapbox to promote EA Biowares choice.

Comparing FONV to KOTOR2..."you know FONV will feel like an expansion, only longer" Complete donkey bull as FONV has no connection with the main character from FO3, as already stated from Beth.

Having a connection to the prior games main character is one very important feature of expansions, in most cases you are the main character from the previous game. You and Bioware are seemingly getting looser and looser with the term expansion.

Besides let's stay on point with the topic and stop trying to go off on badly conceived tangents.  Assuming DAOA used the same development and resources of DAO. Awakenings seems on the tad expensive side, even more so if you get a digital copy which will cost the same as retail copy.
The people that have a good price on it would be in the UK where it runs, 15 quid which is about $20. If you can get the game for $20-25 new or used that would be a fair deal.

FONV runso n FO3 engine modified
KOTOR 2 runs on KOTOR 1 engine modified
Both are developed by OBSIDIAN

KOTOR 2 and FONV are FULL PRICED

DAOA runs on DAO engine modified
DAO A is DISCOUNTED PRICE

Is your arguement that if a game uses the same engine they are just expansions? For example GOW2, under your system, is just an expansion to GOW? Or is anything produced using the Unreal Engine an expansion of the games that came before it using the Unreal Engine? 

No, that is a nice try at straw manning.

My argument is unchanged.

Name another single player game for the PS360 that launched at $40 and had 25 hours of single player.  You cant.

The point about KOTOR II feeling like an expansion, and Fallout New Vegas feeling like an expansion is not a debate, it's a TRUISM.  Everyone who has played KOTOR II agrees, it's feels, looks, plays exactly like a really long expansion.

Every preview of FO NV says the same things, feels like it's going to be a really cool expansion.

KOTOR II and FO NV were both from Obsidian, both are FULL PRICED games.

DAOA follows the same idea,  looks, feels the same as the original, BUT has new stuff.  AND it's discounted.

Yet some of you are still complaining.   EA could have EASILY added in a deathmatch mode, stripped out 10 hours of single player, launched it at $60 w/ a Drew Brees sink free DLC and called it Dragon Age Origins II

It really isn't a straw man, I am taking your logic and applying it to another situation with the same formula and asking you if that is how you would apply it. I am not trying to refute what you said just trying to understand it. I am just trying to figure out how you think so we can agree on some common ground (Also if you want you could  PM and expain how you think it is a straw man and if you want include your answer to the question posed so we don't clutter up the forum, I thought it was a fair question and is right in line with your type of arguements)

Also I wouldn't call it a truism about KOTOR II or FO NV. I read a pretty recent preview of FO NV and just because it uses a modified FO engine, which is just a modified Oblivion engine, I don't think it is just an expansion based on what was said. Again feel free to PM me so we don't clutter this up anymore. Because I am certain not EVERYONE who has played KOTOR II has thought it was an expansion.....and you say I am using fallacies just by asking you questions...

Also can I only name a $40.00 game or can I still mention Deadly Premonition at $20.00 being around 25 hours in length, because I have named that twice now and you continue to ignore it?

Deadly Premonition = Budget game originally developed for PS2.  Have you actually watched gameplay videos of DP?  It looks cool and interesting, but the gameplay engine is 5 years old and very very cheap

Yes, FO NV is technically not classified as an "expansion". However, neither was KOTOR II.  If you played KOTOR II you know yourself it felt/looked/played exactly like an expansion.   Full price.

Every single FO NV preview says the same thing, feels a LOT like FO3, feels/ looks like an expansion.  The difference, length.

So yes, technically whether or not something is an "expansion" is defined by the publisher.  Halo ODST is an example.  BUngie wanted a discounted price.  Microsoft insisted on full price.  So technically NOT an expansion.  Yet even the developers consider it an expansion.

My point, is value/price relative to other games released.

If your only example of value/price in comparison from another game is Deadly Prem, that sort of proves my point doesn't it?

If $40 for 25hours of single player is not a good value for some people, so be it.  My point is if that is how they define value, 99.9% of single player games are not worth buying in their opinion.

The only games in recent memory to outstrip the 25 hours/ $40 price tag FO3, DAO, Borderlands maybe

[Murphys_Law]

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

$36.99 for a 25 hour single player game is CHEAP compared to 99% of single player games on the market.

Uncharted 2 is $60 and 10 hours long. CODMW is 5 hours long and $60. (oh but it has MP! ... I'm talking single player, MP FPS is cheap, any fan can make maps and mods, that's not real content)

Let's compare apples to oranges.  DA:A is an expansion.  None of those games are.  DA:A is an RPG and RPGs have different length standards than other game types.  None of those games are RPGs.  DA:A has no multiplayer content.  Those games have MP and no matter how much hand waving you try to do about it, it is still significant content.  Bad argument is bad.

Ok lets compare to other RPG expansions that are 25 hours long and released recently..
/crickets

There haven't been any to compare to!  The "hand waving" about MP in FPS is not "hand waving" at all.

Here is an example.  What is the best multiplayer, most played, longest lasting FPS of all time?

Counterstrike!  What was the cost?  ZERO DOLLARS!  

By this "DAOA is too expensive" logic, all MP games should be free?

Fallout NVegas is coming, uses the same engine as FO3, and is not technically an expansion.  But if you played KOTOR 2, you know FONV will feel like an expansion, only longer.

But what is the complaint here?  If DAOA was 60 hours how much should it have been? I spent 300hours on Morrowind, should I have paid  $250 for it?

Are people advocating we pay per hour of gameplay in a RPG?

Final Fantasy Tactics would have cost me $600

Since when did we only need examples of games released "recently" (as subjective as that term is)?  How about comparing it to the expansions of BG 1/2 and the NWN 1/2?  Either way your comparsion was flat-out awful and misleading, but nice try backtracking.

What are you babbling about?  Counterstrike was a player made mod...it wasn't made by Valve, so of course they didn't get any money from it directly.  However, they did recieve money in the amount of people who bought Half-life to play CS.  Later on, when Valve relized how profitable the CS franshise is, they made Counter Strike: Source and guess what it costs money!  There are plenty of games that offer SP and MP...CoD:MW2 among many others.  MP becomes part of the prodcut because the develpers work on it...it is content no matter how much hand waving you are trying to do.  Your arguments are laughably bad, please just stop posting and embarrassing yourself.

Some people are making the point that this expansion costs a lot more than expansions for RPGs in the past.  It also did not met the quality and/or length standards that, Bioware has set themselves, and of previous expansions from RPGs.  Surprisingly, customers complain when they do not feel they got their moneys worth.  Your attempt at a slippery slope fallacy (look it up) by saying the complainers want to pay per hour really has nothing to do with what they are talking about.  You cannot just take someone's complaint about one game and suddenly make it out that they are trying to make some universal law about pay per hour.  Awakenings is very short for a $40 RPG expansion, that is all they are saying.

[Haexpane]

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

$36.99 for a 25 hour single player game is CHEAP compared to 99% of single player games on the market.

Uncharted 2 is $60 and 10 hours long. CODMW is 5 hours long and $60. (oh but it has MP! ... I'm talking single player, MP FPS is cheap, any fan can make maps and mods, that's not real content)

Let's compare apples to oranges.  DA:A is an expansion.  None of those games are.  DA:A is an RPG and RPGs have different length standards than other game types.  None of those games are RPGs.  DA:A has no multiplayer content.  Those games have MP and no matter how much hand waving you try to do about it, it is still significant content.  Bad argument is bad.

Ok lets compare to other RPG expansions that are 25 hours long and released recently..
/crickets

There haven't been any to compare to!  The "hand waving" about MP in FPS is not "hand waving" at all.

Here is an example.  What is the best multiplayer, most played, longest lasting FPS of all time?

Counterstrike!  What was the cost?  ZERO DOLLARS!  

By this "DAOA is too expensive" logic, all MP games should be free?

Fallout NVegas is coming, uses the same engine as FO3, and is not technically an expansion.  But if you played KOTOR 2, you know FONV will feel like an expansion, only longer.

But what is the complaint here?  If DAOA was 60 hours how much should it have been? I spent 300hours on Morrowind, should I have paid  $250 for it?

Are people advocating we pay per hour of gameplay in a RPG?

Final Fantasy Tactics would have cost me $600

Since when did we only need examples of games released "recently" (as subjective as that term is)?  How about comparing it to the expansions of BG 1/2 and the NWN 1/2?  Either way your comparsion was flat-out awful and misleading, but nice try backtracking.

What are you babbling about?  Counterstrike was a player made mod...it wasn't made by Valve, so of course they didn't get any money from it directly.  However, they did recieve money in the amount of people who bought Half-life to play CS.  Later on, when Valve relized how profitable the CS franshise is, they made Counter Strike: Source and guess what it costs money!  There are plenty of games that offer SP and MP...CoD:MW2 among many others.  MP becomes part of the prodcut because the develpers work on it...it is content no matter how much hand waving you are trying to do.  Your arguments are laughably bad, please just stop posting and embarrassing yourself.

Some people are making the point that this expansion costs a lot more than expansions for RPGs in the past.  It also did not met the quality and/or length standards that, Bioware has set themselves, and of previous expansions from RPGs.  Surprisingly, customers complain when they do not feel they got their moneys worth.  Your attempt at a slippery slope fallacy (look it up) by saying the complainers want to pay per hour really has nothing to do with what they are talking about.  You cannot just take someone's complaint about one game and suddenly make it out that they are trying to make some universal law about pay per hour.  Awakenings is very short for a $40 RPG expansion, that is all they are saying.

And here we go w/ the angry kiddy keyboard tough guy insults.

Wrong, the complainers ARE talking about price per hour
Since when does a game's price have to be based on games released recently?  What else are you going to compare it to?

The fact that you bring up CODMW2 again proves the same point.  You can call peer2peer glicth filled matchmaking "content" all you like.  It's NOT single player content.  
No AI, No story, no dialog.

That's the point about Counstrike. It was a player made mod.  This shows how easy it is to make FPS MP maps and modes.  It's trivial compared to crafting a single player experience.  

If people want to be suckers and pay big money for a 5 hour long game like CODMW2, go for it. If you want to pay $60 for a 5 hour long game w/ a crap campaign and then some janky peer2peer glitch filled multiplayer teabagging.  Go nuts.

Just dont' come crying about a 25 hour long single player game at a discounted price and pout and stamp your feet about it.

Making maps for a FPS is 100000x easier than making single player content.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you at this point.

So again, name another single player game that has 25 hours of content and was $40 and released in the past 3 years that even compares to DAOA?

Is DAOA shorter than the BG2 expansions?  Of course it is.  Guess what DAO is also a lot shoter than BG2

[Murphys_Law]

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

$36.99 for a 25 hour single player game is CHEAP compared to 99% of single player games on the market.

Uncharted 2 is $60 and 10 hours long. CODMW is 5 hours long and $60. (oh but it has MP! ... I'm talking single player, MP FPS is cheap, any fan can make maps and mods, that's not real content)

Let's compare apples to oranges.  DA:A is an expansion.  None of those games are.  DA:A is an RPG and RPGs have different length standards than other game types.  None of those games are RPGs.  DA:A has no multiplayer content.  Those games have MP and no matter how much hand waving you try to do about it, it is still significant content.  Bad argument is bad.

Ok lets compare to other RPG expansions that are 25 hours long and released recently..
/crickets

There haven't been any to compare to!  The "hand waving" about MP in FPS is not "hand waving" at all.

Here is an example.  What is the best multiplayer, most played, longest lasting FPS of all time?

Counterstrike!  What was the cost?  ZERO DOLLARS!  

By this "DAOA is too expensive" logic, all MP games should be free?

Fallout NVegas is coming, uses the same engine as FO3, and is not technically an expansion.  But if you played KOTOR 2, you know FONV will feel like an expansion, only longer.

But what is the complaint here?  If DAOA was 60 hours how much should it have been? I spent 300hours on Morrowind, should I have paid  $250 for it?

Are people advocating we pay per hour of gameplay in a RPG?

Final Fantasy Tactics would have cost me $600

Since when did we only need examples of games released "recently" (as subjective as that term is)?  How about comparing it to the expansions of BG 1/2 and the NWN 1/2?  Either way your comparsion was flat-out awful and misleading, but nice try backtracking.

What are you babbling about?  Counterstrike was a player made mod...it wasn't made by Valve, so of course they didn't get any money from it directly.  However, they did recieve money in the amount of people who bought Half-life to play CS.  Later on, when Valve relized how profitable the CS franshise is, they made Counter Strike: Source and guess what it costs money!  There are plenty of games that offer SP and MP...CoD:MW2 among many others.  MP becomes part of the prodcut because the develpers work on it...it is content no matter how much hand waving you are trying to do.  Your arguments are laughably bad, please just stop posting and embarrassing yourself.

Some people are making the point that this expansion costs a lot more than expansions for RPGs in the past.  It also did not met the quality and/or length standards that, Bioware has set themselves, and of previous expansions from RPGs.  Surprisingly, customers complain when they do not feel they got their moneys worth.  Your attempt at a slippery slope fallacy (look it up) by saying the complainers want to pay per hour really has nothing to do with what they are talking about.  You cannot just take someone's complaint about one game and suddenly make it out that they are trying to make some universal law about pay per hour.  Awakenings is very short for a $40 RPG expansion, that is all they are saying.

And here we go w/ the angry kiddy keyboard tough guy insults.

Wrong, the complainers ARE talking about price per hour
Since when does a game's price have to be based on games released recently?  What else are you going to compare it to?

The fact that you bring up CODMW2 again proves the same point.  You can call peer2peer glicth filled matchmaking "content" all you like.  It's NOT single player content.  
No AI, No story, no dialog.

That's the point about Counstrike. It was a player made mod.  This shows how easy it is to make FPS MP maps and modes.  It's trivial compared to crafting a single player experience.  

If people want to be suckers and pay big money for a 5 hour long game like CODMW2, go for it. If you want to pay $60 for a 5 hour long game w/ a crap campaign and then some janky peer2peer glitch filled multiplayer teabagging.  Go nuts.

Just dont' come crying about a 25 hour long single player game at a discounted price and pout and stamp your feet about it.

Making maps for a FPS is 100000x easier than making single player content.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you at this point.

So again, name another single player game that has 25 hours of content and was $40 and released in the past 3 years that even compares to DAOA?

Is DAOA shorter than the BG2 expansions?  Of course it is.  Guess what DAO is also a lot shoter than BG2

Tough guy insults?  When did I directly insult you?  Your "arguments" fully deserve to be insulted and instead of acknowledging how bad they are you just change the subject (comparing apples to oranges is a classic!).  Start making real points about the issue at hand.  You are going on tangent rants that have nothing to do with what we are talking about.  As much as I would like to hear the opinion of someone, who has never developed a game in his/her life, talk about how "easy" it is to make multiplayer (protip: CS uses the Half-life engine otherwise it doesn't even work), I would rather you focus your attention on my arguments or come up with some of your own.  Once again, stop purposly only allowing examples that support your argument.  Single player RPGs are a dying genre, in case you didn't notice, so framing an example in the last 3 years isn't going to come up with much (especially true for BG-like RPGs). 

You conceed that DA:A is shorter than the BG2 examples yet you ignore that it also costs $10 more than the BG2 expansions.  $10 more for less content.  $10 less than the full DA:O game.  That is also ignoring the other quality control issues that DA:A has that BG2 expansions didn't (hint: see lots of bugs).  I do not agree DA:O is a lot shorter than BG2 and I have no idea how you reached that conclusion.  They were about the same length in my opinion and, if you put a gun to my head and made me chose, I would chose BG2 due to the greater amount of side content.

[fishx255]

Haexpane wrote...
And here we go w/ the angry kiddy keyboard tough guy insults.

Wrong, the complainers ARE talking about price per hour
Since when does a game's price have to be based on games released recently?  What else are you going to compare it to?

The fact that you bring up CODMW2 again proves the same point.  You can call peer2peer glicth filled matchmaking "content" all you like.  It's NOT single player content.  
No AI, No story, no dialog.

That's the point about Counstrike. It was a player made mod.  This shows how easy it is to make FPS MP maps and modes.  It's trivial compared to crafting a single player experience.  

If people want to be suckers and pay big money for a 5 hour long game like CODMW2, go for it. If you want to pay $60 for a 5 hour long game w/ a crap campaign and then some janky peer2peer glitch filled multiplayer teabagging.  Go nuts.

Just dont' come crying about a 25 hour long single player game at a discounted price and pout and stamp your feet about it.

Making maps for a FPS is 100000x easier than making single player content.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you at this point.

So again, name another single player game that has 25 hours of content and was $40 and released in the past 3 years that even compares to DAOA?

Is DAOA shorter than the BG2 expansions?  Of course it is.  Guess what DAO is also a lot shoter than BG2

You clearly aren't biased at all. Not everyone complained about the game time, and how many games in the past 3 years have had expansions released? You can't play daoa without paying for the original game so compairing it to stand alone games is fail. That is the reason why it costs 40 dollars and not 60, why would a game company release a game for under what the standard price for games are atm.

You do understand balancing a game for multiplayer can be just as hard if not harder then making a single player game. Which dragon age really has no balance at all, many spells make the game too easy and awakenings just made it worse. Alot of people buy those fps games because of the multiplayer alone. Multiplayer games give much more challenging and competitive gameplay compaired to single player games.From your posts it looks like  you are probably bad at them and are salty.

I just want to add that I have never bought a halo or mw game

Modifié par fishx255, 06 mai 2010 - 04:23 .

[Brako Shepard]

Personally I think BioWare's DLC pricing is very fair.

Most of it cost's less than a fiver (or just over) and its priced very well for what we get.

[fishx255]

Brako Shepard wrote...

Personally I think BioWare's DLC pricing is very fair.

Most of it cost's less than a fiver (or just over) and its priced very well for what we get.

no dlc pricing is skewed in favor of the game companys
Do you really feel feastday gifts are worth it? Rto didn't really seem like it took alot of work to make. You pay 7 dollars for kasumi in mass effect and an hour of gameplay. Its up to the consumer if they want to get that extra hour of game play or not but its still not exactly a fair price.

[Haexpane]

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

$36.99 for a 25 hour single player game is CHEAP compared to 99% of single player games on the market.

Uncharted 2 is $60 and 10 hours long. CODMW is 5 hours long and $60. (oh but it has MP! ... I'm talking single player, MP FPS is cheap, any fan can make maps and mods, that's not real content)

Let's compare apples to oranges.  DA:A is an expansion.  None of those games are.  DA:A is an RPG and RPGs have different length standards than other game types.  None of those games are RPGs.  DA:A has no multiplayer content.  Those games have MP and no matter how much hand waving you try to do about it, it is still significant content.  Bad argument is bad.

Ok lets compare to other RPG expansions that are 25 hours long and released recently..
/crickets

There haven't been any to compare to!  The "hand waving" about MP in FPS is not "hand waving" at all.

Here is an example.  What is the best multiplayer, most played, longest lasting FPS of all time?

Counterstrike!  What was the cost?  ZERO DOLLARS!  

By this "DAOA is too expensive" logic, all MP games should be free?

Fallout NVegas is coming, uses the same engine as FO3, and is not technically an expansion.  But if you played KOTOR 2, you know FONV will feel like an expansion, only longer.

But what is the complaint here?  If DAOA was 60 hours how much should it have been? I spent 300hours on Morrowind, should I have paid  $250 for it?

Are people advocating we pay per hour of gameplay in a RPG?

Final Fantasy Tactics would have cost me $600

Since when did we only need examples of games released "recently" (as subjective as that term is)?  How about comparing it to the expansions of BG 1/2 and the NWN 1/2?  Either way your comparsion was flat-out awful and misleading, but nice try backtracking.

What are you babbling about?  Counterstrike was a player made mod...it wasn't made by Valve, so of course they didn't get any money from it directly.  However, they did recieve money in the amount of people who bought Half-life to play CS.  Later on, when Valve relized how profitable the CS franshise is, they made Counter Strike: Source and guess what it costs money!  There are plenty of games that offer SP and MP...CoD:MW2 among many others.  MP becomes part of the prodcut because the develpers work on it...it is content no matter how much hand waving you are trying to do.  Your arguments are laughably bad, please just stop posting and embarrassing yourself.

Some people are making the point that this expansion costs a lot more than expansions for RPGs in the past.  It also did not met the quality and/or length standards that, Bioware has set themselves, and of previous expansions from RPGs.  Surprisingly, customers complain when they do not feel they got their moneys worth.  Your attempt at a slippery slope fallacy (look it up) by saying the complainers want to pay per hour really has nothing to do with what they are talking about.  You cannot just take someone's complaint about one game and suddenly make it out that they are trying to make some universal law about pay per hour.  Awakenings is very short for a $40 RPG expansion, that is all they are saying.

And here we go w/ the angry kiddy keyboard tough guy insults.

Wrong, the complainers ARE talking about price per hour
Since when does a game's price have to be based on games released recently?  What else are you going to compare it to?

The fact that you bring up CODMW2 again proves the same point.  You can call peer2peer glicth filled matchmaking "content" all you like.  It's NOT single player content.  
No AI, No story, no dialog.

That's the point about Counstrike. It was a player made mod.  This shows how easy it is to make FPS MP maps and modes.  It's trivial compared to crafting a single player experience.  

If people want to be suckers and pay big money for a 5 hour long game like CODMW2, go for it. If you want to pay $60 for a 5 hour long game w/ a crap campaign and then some janky peer2peer glitch filled multiplayer teabagging.  Go nuts.

Just dont' come crying about a 25 hour long single player game at a discounted price and pout and stamp your feet about it.

Making maps for a FPS is 100000x easier than making single player content.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you at this point.

So again, name another single player game that has 25 hours of content and was $40 and released in the past 3 years that even compares to DAOA?

Is DAOA shorter than the BG2 expansions?  Of course it is.  Guess what DAO is also a lot shoter than BG2

Tough guy insults?  When did I directly insult you?  Your "arguments" fully deserve to be insulted and instead of acknowledging how bad they are you just change the subject (comparing apples to oranges is a classic!).  Start making real points about the issue at hand.  You are going on tangent rants that have nothing to do with what we are talking about.  As much as I would like to hear the opinion of someone, who has never developed a game in his/her life, talk about how "easy" it is to make multiplayer (protip: CS uses the Half-life engine otherwise it doesn't even work), I would rather you focus your attention on my arguments or come up with some of your own.  Once again, stop purposly only allowing examples that support your argument.  Single player RPGs are a dying genre, in case you didn't notice, so framing an example in the last 3 years isn't going to come up with much (especially true for BG-like RPGs). 

You conceed that DA:A is shorter than the BG2 examples yet you ignore that it also costs $10 more than the BG2 expansions.  $10 more for less content.  $10 less than the full DA:O game.  That is also ignoring the other quality control issues that DA:A has that BG2 expansions didn't (hint: see lots of bugs).  I do not agree DA:O is a lot shorter than BG2 and I have no idea how you reached that conclusion.  They were about the same length in my opinion and, if you put a gun to my head and made me chose, I would chose BG2 due to the greater amount of side content.

Dude, how long ago was BG2 again?  You're living in the past.  How much BG2 cost is completely irrelevant.  Different era, different publisher etc...  I am a huge BG2 fan.

You are now making excuses for your poor argument and attacks.  "Single player RPGs is a dying genre" does not excuse your baseless attacks and angry rants.

[Haexpane]

fishx255 wrote...

 

You clearly aren't biased at all. Not everyone complained about the game time, and how many games in the past 3 years have had expansions released? You can't play daoa without paying for the original game so compairing it to stand alone games is fail. That is the reason why it costs 40 dollars and not 60, why would a game company release a game for under what the standard price for games are atm.

You do understand balancing a game for multiplayer can be just as hard if not harder then making a single player game. Which dragon age really has no balance at all, many spells make the game too easy and awakenings just made it worse. Alot of people buy those fps games because of the multiplayer alone. Multiplayer games give much more challenging and competitive gameplay compaired to single player games.From your posts it looks like  you are probably bad at them and are salty.

I just want to add that I have never bought a halo or mw game

Wait, is your argument really "you sux at FPS LOL"?  REALLY?  that's the best you can do?

Balancing MP is not easy, but it's 100000x easier than developing single player content.  Tweaking parameters is a far cry from writing a good story, getting voice acting captured, resolving quest threads, debugging etc...

Of course PVP is "more challenging" since when is "how hard is it" determine the price point of a game>?

Of course COD and Halo teabaggers buy those games so they can teabag, what does that have to do w/ anything?   BTW I've played a ton of FPS back in the day, CS, Halo, SOCOM, RTCW etc...  So the whole kiddy "u SUX" insult is worthless.  I've been there, done that, i speak from experience.

[Haexpane]

fishx255 wrote...

Brako Shepard wrote...

Personally I think BioWare's DLC pricing is very fair.

Most of it cost's less than a fiver (or just over) and its priced very well for what we get.

no dlc pricing is skewed in favor of the game companys
Do you really feel feastday gifts are worth it? Rto didn't really seem like it took alot of work to make. You pay 7 dollars for kasumi in mass effect and an hour of gameplay. Its up to the consumer if they want to get that extra hour of game play or not but its still not exactly a fair price.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.  This guy Brako said he thinks the price is fair.  And he gets ATTACKED for it.  Haters are incredulous that he thinks $5 was fair for RTO. how could he?  

Again , if you don't think $5 is "fair" for 1 hour DLC, don't buy it.  The most successful DLC only sells like 20% of install base, so clearly the majority of owners of the game aren't buying the DLC, even when it's highly rated.

If DAO DLC is so "unfair" then please, show us DLC for other games that is fair?  Halo rehased maps?  $15 for CODMW2 maps?  You tell us what is fair and where to get it.

[fishx255]

First of all I wasn't attacking anyone, I said its up to the consumer if they want to buy the dlc or not. I also wasn't talking about biowares dlc only its all dlc.The dlc may be worth it to someone but the fact remains that the money they make from it compaired to time developing the dlc is in fact in favor of the game company. People paid 25 dollars for a reskinned flying mount in wow recently and if you ask those people if it was worth the money they say yes. That is 1/3 of the cost of a game for one digital item.

I point out why multiplayer is meaningful content and you argue about diffuculty doesn't matter for the price of the game? Where did I say it had anything to do with the price? As far as dao story goes it isn't that great and you act like thier is zero story invovled in those other games singleplayer content. I wasn't saying you suck, I said by the tone of your posts and clear hatred for those games it would appear that you are just bitter. Good job not defending against any arguement I made. Lets keep throwing numbers you pull out of nowhere on how easy something is somemore aswell.

Modifié par fishx255, 06 mai 2010 - 08:26 .

[Murphys_Law]

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

$36.99 for a 25 hour single player game is CHEAP compared to 99% of single player games on the market.

Uncharted 2 is $60 and 10 hours long. CODMW is 5 hours long and $60. (oh but it has MP! ... I'm talking single player, MP FPS is cheap, any fan can make maps and mods, that's not real content)

Let's compare apples to oranges.  DA:A is an expansion.  None of those games are.  DA:A is an RPG and RPGs have different length standards than other game types.  None of those games are RPGs.  DA:A has no multiplayer content.  Those games have MP and no matter how much hand waving you try to do about it, it is still significant content.  Bad argument is bad.

Ok lets compare to other RPG expansions that are 25 hours long and released recently..
/crickets

There haven't been any to compare to!  The "hand waving" about MP in FPS is not "hand waving" at all.

Here is an example.  What is the best multiplayer, most played, longest lasting FPS of all time?

Counterstrike!  What was the cost?  ZERO DOLLARS!  

By this "DAOA is too expensive" logic, all MP games should be free?

Fallout NVegas is coming, uses the same engine as FO3, and is not technically an expansion.  But if you played KOTOR 2, you know FONV will feel like an expansion, only longer.

But what is the complaint here?  If DAOA was 60 hours how much should it have been? I spent 300hours on Morrowind, should I have paid  $250 for it?

Are people advocating we pay per hour of gameplay in a RPG?

Final Fantasy Tactics would have cost me $600

Since when did we only need examples of games released "recently" (as subjective as that term is)?  How about comparing it to the expansions of BG 1/2 and the NWN 1/2?  Either way your comparsion was flat-out awful and misleading, but nice try backtracking.

What are you babbling about?  Counterstrike was a player made mod...it wasn't made by Valve, so of course they didn't get any money from it directly.  However, they did recieve money in the amount of people who bought Half-life to play CS.  Later on, when Valve relized how profitable the CS franshise is, they made Counter Strike: Source and guess what it costs money!  There are plenty of games that offer SP and MP...CoD:MW2 among many others.  MP becomes part of the prodcut because the develpers work on it...it is content no matter how much hand waving you are trying to do.  Your arguments are laughably bad, please just stop posting and embarrassing yourself.

Some people are making the point that this expansion costs a lot more than expansions for RPGs in the past.  It also did not met the quality and/or length standards that, Bioware has set themselves, and of previous expansions from RPGs.  Surprisingly, customers complain when they do not feel they got their moneys worth.  Your attempt at a slippery slope fallacy (look it up) by saying the complainers want to pay per hour really has nothing to do with what they are talking about.  You cannot just take someone's complaint about one game and suddenly make it out that they are trying to make some universal law about pay per hour.  Awakenings is very short for a $40 RPG expansion, that is all they are saying.

And here we go w/ the angry kiddy keyboard tough guy insults.

Wrong, the complainers ARE talking about price per hour
Since when does a game's price have to be based on games released recently?  What else are you going to compare it to?

The fact that you bring up CODMW2 again proves the same point.  You can call peer2peer glicth filled matchmaking "content" all you like.  It's NOT single player content.  
No AI, No story, no dialog.

That's the point about Counstrike. It was a player made mod.  This shows how easy it is to make FPS MP maps and modes.  It's trivial compared to crafting a single player experience.  

If people want to be suckers and pay big money for a 5 hour long game like CODMW2, go for it. If you want to pay $60 for a 5 hour long game w/ a crap campaign and then some janky peer2peer glitch filled multiplayer teabagging.  Go nuts.

Just dont' come crying about a 25 hour long single player game at a discounted price and pout and stamp your feet about it.

Making maps for a FPS is 100000x easier than making single player content.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you at this point.

So again, name another single player game that has 25 hours of content and was $40 and released in the past 3 years that even compares to DAOA?

Is DAOA shorter than the BG2 expansions?  Of course it is.  Guess what DAO is also a lot shoter than BG2

Tough guy insults?  When did I directly insult you?  Your "arguments" fully deserve to be insulted and instead of acknowledging how bad they are you just change the subject (comparing apples to oranges is a classic!).  Start making real points about the issue at hand.  You are going on tangent rants that have nothing to do with what we are talking about.  As much as I would like to hear the opinion of someone, who has never developed a game in his/her life, talk about how "easy" it is to make multiplayer (protip: CS uses the Half-life engine otherwise it doesn't even work), I would rather you focus your attention on my arguments or come up with some of your own.  Once again, stop purposly only allowing examples that support your argument.  Single player RPGs are a dying genre, in case you didn't notice, so framing an example in the last 3 years isn't going to come up with much (especially true for BG-like RPGs). 

You conceed that DA:A is shorter than the BG2 examples yet you ignore that it also costs $10 more than the BG2 expansions.  $10 more for less content.  $10 less than the full DA:O game.  That is also ignoring the other quality control issues that DA:A has that BG2 expansions didn't (hint: see lots of bugs).  I do not agree DA:O is a lot shorter than BG2 and I have no idea how you reached that conclusion.  They were about the same length in my opinion and, if you put a gun to my head and made me chose, I would chose BG2 due to the greater amount of side content.

Dude, how long ago was BG2 again?  You're living in the past.  How much BG2 cost is completely irrelevant.  Different era, different publisher etc...  I am a huge BG2 fan.

You are now making excuses for your poor argument and attacks.  "Single player RPGs is a dying genre" does not excuse your baseless attacks and angry rants.

BG2 was released September 26, 2000.  That isn't that long ago...  This very game uses many ideas from that "old" game.  Most full PC games are still $50 and most expansions are in the $20-30 price range and this still holds true today.  I fail to see how time has anything to do with it.  Different publisher kinda goes with my point.  It is pretty obvious to anyone, with a cursory understanding of economics, that the $40 pricetag was just a quick cashgrab by EA.  They had a successful release, so they rushed Awakenings out the door to ride that gravytrain as long as possible.  I normally wouldn't mind, but when the quality is suffering that is where I take issue.  So you are right BG2 didn't have the problem of an overly greedy publisher like EA.  That doesn't suddenly mean my comparsion is invalid, but I find it amusing how easily you dismiss the BG2 comparison but accept comparing DA:O to a FPSer.

I really wish you would debate my "poor argument and attacks", instead of nitpicking and arguing schematics.  "single player RPGs is a dying genre" has nothing to do with my "baseless attacks and angry rants" and everything to do with your extremely poor debate style.  I only mentioned the dying of singlke player RPGs to highlight that there are not any "recent" games to compare DA:O to and that is why it is often compared to BG1/2 and NWN1/2.  Are you really still trying to defend your apples and oranges comparsion? 

[Haexpane]

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

$36.99 for a 25 hour single player game is CHEAP compared to 99% of single player games on the market.

Uncharted 2 is $60 and 10 hours long. CODMW is 5 hours long and $60. (oh but it has MP! ... I'm talking single player, MP FPS is cheap, any fan can make maps and mods, that's not real content)

Let's compare apples to oranges.  DA:A is an expansion.  None of those games are.  DA:A is an RPG and RPGs have different length standards than other game types.  None of those games are RPGs.  DA:A has no multiplayer content.  Those games have MP and no matter how much hand waving you try to do about it, it is still significant content.  Bad argument is bad.

Ok lets compare to other RPG expansions that are 25 hours long and released recently..
/crickets

There haven't been any to compare to!  The "hand waving" about MP in FPS is not "hand waving" at all.

Here is an example.  What is the best multiplayer, most played, longest lasting FPS of all time?

Counterstrike!  What was the cost?  ZERO DOLLARS!  

By this "DAOA is too expensive" logic, all MP games should be free?

Fallout NVegas is coming, uses the same engine as FO3, and is not technically an expansion.  But if you played KOTOR 2, you know FONV will feel like an expansion, only longer.

But what is the complaint here?  If DAOA was 60 hours how much should it have been? I spent 300hours on Morrowind, should I have paid  $250 for it?

Are people advocating we pay per hour of gameplay in a RPG?

Final Fantasy Tactics would have cost me $600

Since when did we only need examples of games released "recently" (as subjective as that term is)?  How about comparing it to the expansions of BG 1/2 and the NWN 1/2?  Either way your comparsion was flat-out awful and misleading, but nice try backtracking.

What are you babbling about?  Counterstrike was a player made mod...it wasn't made by Valve, so of course they didn't get any money from it directly.  However, they did recieve money in the amount of people who bought Half-life to play CS.  Later on, when Valve relized how profitable the CS franshise is, they made Counter Strike: Source and guess what it costs money!  There are plenty of games that offer SP and MP...CoD:MW2 among many others.  MP becomes part of the prodcut because the develpers work on it...it is content no matter how much hand waving you are trying to do.  Your arguments are laughably bad, please just stop posting and embarrassing yourself.

Some people are making the point that this expansion costs a lot more than expansions for RPGs in the past.  It also did not met the quality and/or length standards that, Bioware has set themselves, and of previous expansions from RPGs.  Surprisingly, customers complain when they do not feel they got their moneys worth.  Your attempt at a slippery slope fallacy (look it up) by saying the complainers want to pay per hour really has nothing to do with what they are talking about.  You cannot just take someone's complaint about one game and suddenly make it out that they are trying to make some universal law about pay per hour.  Awakenings is very short for a $40 RPG expansion, that is all they are saying.

And here we go w/ the angry kiddy keyboard tough guy insults.

Wrong, the complainers ARE talking about price per hour
Since when does a game's price have to be based on games released recently?  What else are you going to compare it to?

The fact that you bring up CODMW2 again proves the same point.  You can call peer2peer glicth filled matchmaking "content" all you like.  It's NOT single player content.  
No AI, No story, no dialog.

That's the point about Counstrike. It was a player made mod.  This shows how easy it is to make FPS MP maps and modes.  It's trivial compared to crafting a single player experience.  

If people want to be suckers and pay big money for a 5 hour long game like CODMW2, go for it. If you want to pay $60 for a 5 hour long game w/ a crap campaign and then some janky peer2peer glitch filled multiplayer teabagging.  Go nuts.

Just dont' come crying about a 25 hour long single player game at a discounted price and pout and stamp your feet about it.

Making maps for a FPS is 100000x easier than making single player content.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you at this point.

So again, name another single player game that has 25 hours of content and was $40 and released in the past 3 years that even compares to DAOA?

Is DAOA shorter than the BG2 expansions?  Of course it is.  Guess what DAO is also a lot shoter than BG2

Tough guy insults?  When did I directly insult you?  Your "arguments" fully deserve to be insulted and instead of acknowledging how bad they are you just change the subject (comparing apples to oranges is a classic!).  Start making real points about the issue at hand.  You are going on tangent rants that have nothing to do with what we are talking about.  As much as I would like to hear the opinion of someone, who has never developed a game in his/her life, talk about how "easy" it is to make multiplayer (protip: CS uses the Half-life engine otherwise it doesn't even work), I would rather you focus your attention on my arguments or come up with some of your own.  Once again, stop purposly only allowing examples that support your argument.  Single player RPGs are a dying genre, in case you didn't notice, so framing an example in the last 3 years isn't going to come up with much (especially true for BG-like RPGs). 

You conceed that DA:A is shorter than the BG2 examples yet you ignore that it also costs $10 more than the BG2 expansions.  $10 more for less content.  $10 less than the full DA:O game.  That is also ignoring the other quality control issues that DA:A has that BG2 expansions didn't (hint: see lots of bugs).  I do not agree DA:O is a lot shorter than BG2 and I have no idea how you reached that conclusion.  They were about the same length in my opinion and, if you put a gun to my head and made me chose, I would chose BG2 due to the greater amount of side content.

Dude, how long ago was BG2 again?  You're living in the past.  How much BG2 cost is completely irrelevant.  Different era, different publisher etc...  I am a huge BG2 fan.

You are now making excuses for your poor argument and attacks.  "Single player RPGs is a dying genre" does not excuse your baseless attacks and angry rants.

BG2 was released September 26, 2000.  That isn't that long ago...  This very game uses many ideas from that "old" game.  Most full PC games are still $50 and most expansions are in the $20-30 price range and this still holds true today.  I fail to see how time has anything to do with it.  Different publisher kinda goes with my point.  It is pretty obvious to anyone, with a cursory understanding of economics, that the $40 pricetag was just a quick cashgrab by EA.  They had a successful release, so they rushed Awakenings out the door to ride that gravytrain as long as possible.  I normally wouldn't mind, but when the quality is suffering that is where I take issue.  So you are right BG2 didn't have the problem of an overly greedy publisher like EA.  That doesn't suddenly mean my comparsion is invalid, but I find it amusing how easily you dismiss the BG2 comparison but accept comparing DA:O to a FPSer.

I really wish you would debate my "poor argument and attacks", instead of nitpicking and arguing schematics.  "single player RPGs is a dying genre" has nothing to do with my "baseless attacks and angry rants" and everything to do with your extremely poor debate style.  I only mentioned the dying of singlke player RPGs to highlight that there are not any "recent" games to compare DA:O to and that is why it is often compared to BG1/2 and NWN1/2.  Are you really still trying to defend your apples and oranges comparsion? 

Everything you posted is factually false.

///BG2 was released September 26, 2000.  That isn't that long ago... ///

That's 10 years ago guy, in videogames that is an ENTIRE 2 GENERATIONS ago!

//// It is pretty obvious to anyone, with a cursory understanding of
economics, that the $40 pricetag was just a quick cashgrab by EA.  They
had a successful release, so they rushed Awakenings out the door to ride
that gravytrain as long as possible.////

More falsehoods and denials of facts.  Awakenings dev stream started BEFORE DAO was even finished.    DAO A was planned well before the "successful release"

The rest of your post is wasted space trying to clumsily insult me while saying the same thing over and over again.  You wang BG2 expansion in 2000 to cost the same as DAOA expansion in 2010 and you aren't going to change your mind.

Ok that's nice, but I want my house to be the same price as a house from 10 years ago.  

Aint Gonna Happen

[AlanC9]

Jeez, Haexpane -- are you going for a nested quote record?

[AlanC9]

Murphys_Law wrote...

You conceed that DA:A is shorter than the BG2 examples yet you ignore that it also costs $10 more than the BG2 expansions.  $10 more for less content.  $10 less than the full DA:O game.

Is that in 2010 dollars? I'm not really comfortable with some of the numbers in this thread.

Modifié par AlanC9, 10 mai 2010 - 07:06 .

[fishx255]

GB: You originally announced Dragon Age in 2004 but then waited until it was only several months from release before showing it to the public. Why the four-year silence? Have any of your goals changed during that time?



Dan: This is a completely new intellectual property so we had to design an entire world and its history from the ground up, and that takes a lot of time, especially if you care as much about quality as BioWare does. We also had to spend time constructing the tools and technology needed to fully realize the scope of the game which, by the way, is enormous. One of the goals all along was to create a world within which you could base an unlimited number of stories, and Dragon Age: Origins is just the beginning. It�s a huge undertaking, but that�s what it takes to deliver the level of quality our fans deserve. It�ll be worth the wait.



So explain to me how a game that was in development for less then a year costs 20 dollars less then something they worked on form 2004-2009. How do they get that bioware quality with such a short development time?

[AlanC9]

fishx255 wrote...
How do they get that bioware quality with such a short development time? 

Who says they did?

[Murphys_Law]

Haexpane wrote...

That's 10 years ago guy, in videogames that is an ENTIRE 2 GENERATIONS ago!

//// It is pretty obvious to anyone, with a cursory understanding of
economics, that the $40 pricetag was just a quick cashgrab by EA.  They
had a successful release, so they rushed Awakenings out the door to ride
that gravytrain as long as possible.////

More falsehoods and denials of facts.  Awakenings dev stream started BEFORE DAO was even finished.    DAO A was planned well before the "successful release"

The rest of your post is wasted space trying to clumsily insult me while saying the same thing over and over again.  You wang BG2 expansion in 2000 to cost the same as DAOA expansion in 2010 and you aren't going to change your mind.

Ok that's nice, but I want my house to be the same price as a house from 10 years ago.  

Aint Gonna Happen

I keep repeating the samething because you have yet to even address my main point.  Once again, your comparsion of DA:O to other modern games is comparing apples to oranges.  I am not going to argue with how apparently, since I have a different opinion to you about how old BG is, that makes me "factually incorrect".  Regardless, it doesn't matter because my point was that there are not other CRPGs to compare DA:O to, so that is why I and many other people do it.

Developers are always working on things until someone tells them they are out of money .  I am pretty sure EA has a good idea of how successful a game is going to be before they release it.  I realize they had this planned ahead of time, that isn't what I was saying (yes I know they worked on it for a year).  In my opinion, they released it before it went through the usual Bioware polish process (as in someone from EA said release NOW).  They are many things wrong with the game that I did not see from a normal Bioware game (bugs glore!, short, lack of depth).  

PC games have always been $50.  Housing prices change dramtically.  Ever hear of price elasticity?  Yeah not every product has drastic price changes.  Another bad comparsion by you, I really think you need to stop doing it.  Calling your opinions "facts" does not make them so.  Ugh I see I am wasting my time trying to debate you...constant changes of subjects and logical fallacies make my head hurt.

[Murphys_Law]

AlanC9 wrote...

Murphys_Law wrote...

You conceed that DA:A is shorter than the BG2 examples yet you ignore that it also costs $10 more than the BG2 expansions.  $10 more for less content.  $10 less than the full DA:O game.

Is that in 2010 dollars? I'm not really comfortable with some of the numbers in this thread.

I didn't realize I stumbled into an economics research forum.  I seriously doubt that conversion will change my point much, but you are welcome to convert it for me . 

[OrlesianWardenCommander]

Wow wont this thread die already!? Bioware has your money like it or not get over it good greif its 40bucks. End of story there are worst things you can buy then awakening get it or not it wont change anyone oppion about this subject lay this to rest its all oppion if its expensive. Theres no point in dwelling on it anylonger let this thread rest in peace.

[AlanC9]

Murphys_Law wrote...
 I am not going to argue with how apparently, since I have a different opinion to you about how old BG is, that makes me "factually incorrect".

You can have an opinion about the release date of a game? 

[AlanC9]

Murphys_Law wrote...
I didn't realize I stumbled into an economics research forum.  I seriously doubt that conversion will change my point much, but you are welcome to convert it for me .  

Not an economics research forum. Just someone who likes people to know what they're talking about. 

CPI's up about 23% since 2001. So at the current Amazon price, DAA's going for about $30 in ToB-equivalent dollars. 

Note that DAO is cheaper than BG2 was in constant dollars. Game prices have consistently fallen for the past couple of decades.

For future reference:  http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

[AlanC9]

OrlesianWardenCommander wrote...

Wow wont this thread die already!? Bioware has your money like it or not get over it good greif its 40bucks. End of story there are worst things you can buy then awakening get it or not it wont change anyone oppion about this subject lay this to rest its all oppion if its expensive. Theres no point in dwelling on it anylonger let this thread rest in peace.

So you're so upset that this thread even exists that you just had to come post in it.....