Planning some paid DLC
Kharador
Member Posts: 215
Yes dudes what a shame. Trent Oster was said that the new content probably were paid. I think those guys would make content with some common sense. But have jumped on the money train. This is very bad news...
@TrentOster: We'll be doing free feature improvements and existing content improvements as we go, but we are also planning some paid DLC.
@TrentOster: We'll be doing free feature improvements and existing content improvements as we go, but we are also planning some paid DLC.
Post edited by Tanthalas on
2
Comments
Besides, I believe Trent meant they are planning to develop some additional new content beside the new NPC and adventures that have already been announced for BG:EE (and which will be included in the game when it ships), and said content will be optional and to be paid for.
I know what the dlc is. Another tale told to the fans for take us our money.
p.s
BG1+2 are big enough and complete games so you dont have to use DLC in order to enjoy them, unlike DA:O
There is DLC and there is DLC.
Unlike a brand new game, the BG community knows what the original game is made of. So it's not like some vanilla game content would be ripped out from the game to be sold as DLC.
Before the so called DLC, there was expansions for games which basically are large DLC. And people did not have a problem with that.
BGEE DLCs are going to be new created contents. Of course they will be made to take money from the fans. Beamdog is a business, the guys don't work at the company just for the fun of it. So I don't see where is the problem with that since it does not affect the original release and since they are optional.
At best the DLC requirements might indirectly requires engine updates which in turn can be used by the modding community.
I have nothing againgt DLC in that context, as long as nothing is done to impair free content development.
In the meantime, I'm moving this discussion to the General subforum.
While this does annoy me, the whole phenomenon of DLC only persists due to the consumers. People just convince themselves that it's reasonable to buy a game and then pay for additional parts of the game that should have been there in the first place. "Well, it's only $10..." but then before you know it you've spent well over $100 and many months collecting the pieces of a complete game (obviously not referring to BG:EE here, but other games with DLC).
The only reason (apart from the fact that the iPad app market is setting the price of the game) that could reasonably cause a need for this is that it's the first product being released by BeamDog. They have time constraints to release a profitable product to make sure that they're not just putting money into something that doesn't end up selling well, so getting the game out and then continuing to work as it makes money is reasonable. I do sincerely hope, however, that this idea doesn't persist to future releases once the company is established. I understand that the DLC will be "optional," and that they of course won't withhold anything besides additional new content, but that doesn't change my point. I want a game to be completed before it's released. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but when I buy a game, I want a complete game, and I'm more than willing to pay for a complete game when I buy it. Paid DLC, single player games that require play through a server/over an internet connection, and overbearing anti-piracy measures that inconvenience paying customers are at the top of my list of things that I seriously dislike in games.
I will of course be buying BG:EE and the DLC as well because, as I've said before, I want to support this team, and hope others do too. I want to see new isometric party-based RPG's come out, and I think this is a great dev team that can provide.
But in common the DLC trend is an innovation for a games longevity when the company makes the right way of use. And every company needs to be paid for work to keep doing their business. So all in all when the use of DLC is fair and for all parties balanced It rocks.!
Same goes for DLC. It's not because it might be released afterward, that the initial game is not considered complete without them.
Or did you mean you are against any kind of expansion post release?
Me I love expansions. It's one of the main reason I like the whole Baldur's Gate experience. Because I could enjoy one after the other: BG,ToSC,BG2 &+TOB prolonging the life of CHARMAN with more fun hours. It's like Baldur's Gate had been super expanded ^^
The only part I don't like in DLC (where they are legitimate and not content removed from the original development) is the DL part, the downloadable aspect certainly most often tied to DRM mechanisms. Like you I despise games that requires Internet authentification and whatnot.
Downloadable additions are also a concern due to their ties to DRM, but as Trent has already mentioned, they are obligated by their publisher to implement some sort of DRM into BG:EE...
Despite my feelings towards DLC in modern games, I believe that it will be done in BG:EE in a way that is as convenient as possible and with as little hassle and frustration to the players as possible, as making things as fun and hassle free as possible seems to be a core tenant of the BeamDog philosophy.
Then after its matter of price vs content to choose if it's worthy or not. It's true there is many DLC sold around that took only little time to build but are sold more than their content value.
However there is another consideration to take into account about overpriced DLC. I think if the DLC business remains successful, we might eventually see attempt of "underpriced" original release, with companies trying to reap more benefits afterward with DLC. Or say otherwise, lure customer easily first, and charge them once they're hooked XD
If they will release a DLC, I belive it will be an extra adventure (Maybe like my Idea to explore the gnoll stronghold ) or something like Trial of the Luremaster, something worth to pay for!
This game comes with a pre-generated fanbase, a community of experienced modders, a huge legacy as the "groundbreaking CRPG against which all others are to be judged", etc. No pressure there.... none at all...
After FFXIII was released, I kept seeing people asking for DLC on message boards.
Yes, it may bring us new and great adventures at a cheap price the first few months/years. But the trend I have seen with companies and DLC is that the bigger the company gets, the less the developers care about players and offering a good experience and the more they care about money. It pains me to say that Beamdog and Overhaul are most likely heading that way too if BGEE is successful. I have seen some of the best studios go that way:
Bioware (my favourite developer prior to DA:O)
DICE (Battlefield)
And a few other good developers.
I hope that Overhaul and Beamdog will be less like EA/Ubisoft in the future and slightly more like Valve, who until now have maintained a good balance between paid DLC and fleshed-out games. I also hope, that while they give us DLC, they will also leave at least the same amount of room for modders to create their own content. This last part has been vanishing rather quickly in games nowadays, which concerns me as a BG fanboy.
In short: Overhaul and Beamdog, I hope that you will at least stay old-school for now, with attention to detail and fans that ruled about ten years ago. DLC is fine by me as long as it is worth the money, like Heart of Winter or Tales of the Sword Coast, or even Throne of Bhaal if you feel generous. Make all the DLC you want, but leave the modders enough breathing room to create mods just as good or better as yours.
-DMZ-
As a Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition game, with all the limits on the develop, the game probally will be something as an upgrade from the Baldur's Gate original. With that in mind i wish just to remember that the Covenant rights granted in terms of use for Baldur's Gate foresee exactly the rights of use on the software and not the possession or material ownership of the software.
This is done cos 1° - software are not considered object in law terms (at least from the points of view i read until now, and i didn't lock myself on my country doctrine only); 2° - it's a way to prevent ppl of exploit the game without proper permissions, as install it in lanhouse to multiple users; 3° avoid ppl of copy the game and repass it with or without economic interest...
There are other reasons but it's not the proper place to discuss them here, but my point is:
We already have the rights for Baldur's Gate as everyone here has brought it one time. With no visible change on the game mechanisms, it's somehow confuse and even debatable what will be the product called BG:EE that comes to be put for sale.
I love the game and i entirely support this BG:EE, i know that even if Beamdog and Overhaul as legal entities had some profitable interest on the game, the reason for this enhance is far greater than economic value, but DLCs are dangeours in an enhanced game.
Why DLCs are dangeours? cos the original content of the game was already been exposed in the old game, if this "new game" come lacking some of the original content of the old game, and latter charge for a DLC with it, that would be charging 2x for the same product. I, at least, will feel a lot cheated if that happens.
worse yet, some new DLCs can can come from an already existent mod or at least based in one what will generate conflict with the owner of the rights of those mods.
My opinion: raise the price of the BG:EE if the problem is financial, but avoid DLCs here, on an enhanced project for an already existing game they can be a recipe for disaster.
I just want to help with this post, i hope ppl don't get me wrong, but in my country for example what i exposed above about the DLCs may be interpreted as the sell of something for what we already have the rights, and if so, would be piracy to download without paying something i already have the right to have?
This is not an article but a personal opinion, i didn't make a research do write this post however i don't raised it without knowledge of the matter. Maybe we can avoid the problem here before it becomes a snowball, just hope this is taken into account.
I found the approach that Bioware took in Dragon Age and Mass Effect 3 in particular a little upsetting. Dragon Age Origins contained too much optional DLC and packs that after a certain point i stopped paying attention or caring even when the additions added to the overal narrative. Some of the additions where great, others like the Wardens keep was a bit disheartening: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/11/6/
In Mass Effect 3, unless you bought the Collector's edition or paid $10 you missed out on a character who really added a lot of perspective to the entire franchise.
I seriously doubt they're going to remove content from the original game to sell as DLC. I'm sure that they're planning brand new content for DLC.
I'll see how it goes though here, I'm cautiosly optimistic and a huge baldur's gate fan.