@immagikman wrong, it gave alot of insight into the prothen mindset and culture that wasn't known before hand, such as the fact that they were slavers. the content actually put the game into a different perspective all together.
But that was NOT needed for the game, Finished just hunky dory without it. I went back and played WITH javik and after seeing the content....I liked the nifty gun and all...but the rest? meh. I just didnt get all caught up in the Mythos of Mass Effect like some of you did I guess, I took the game as is for what it was....and didnt dive into the culture thing....maybe Id have gotten more game play out of it if I had...but I had other games to get on with
ehhhh lots of stuff isn't needed for a game. heck the game itself isn't needed.
we're not going to see eye to eye on this bro. i think it was a cheap tactic to cash in on the fans, you think it was a legitimate business move, and in your eyes, a very successful one.
but all the fans they pissed off, it was a short term gain for a long term loss. i remember disgaea 2 for psp gave out the first dlc for free so that their fans could see what they offered and so that they wouldn't feel cheated, and it was a really nice move on their part.
@Bjjorick hey no problems bro, in the end, we all like what we like. Some times it's quantifiable, or justifiable or rational and some times it is not, the important thing is...spend time doing what makes you happy and don't sweat the small shit
I honestly don't mind paying more to play games as enjoyable as Mass Effect 3. If anything, the trend towards splitting up games and selling bits of them will result in more effective communication between companies and gamers.
With an all-in-one box, the only message you can send with your dollars is 'Buy/No Buy' or 'Like/Dislike'. That's a pretty poor granularity. If the game is sold in multiple parts, say with more characters as one option, more story as another, and more weapons as a third, suddenly the company has real, actual numbers on what's worth delivering, and what people want.
The downside is if they discover that what 95% of the gamers want is X, and what 5% want is Y, if you're in the Y group you're going to start getting underserved. Until niche-targeted companies come out, etc, etc.
It's different, and not always good for any one particular consumer, but I'd argue that on the whole, more people will be happier.
That's the original idea, but we saw enough examples of it not being true. For example: Mass Effect 3's "From Ashes". It was found out that the "additional" crew member, Javik, can be acquired without getting the DLC. By using a save editor and changing Javik's status to already recruited, you can have him in your game as if you bought the DLC. The only thing the DLC added was the mission to recruit him, while he was put to the game during the development. Publishers are abusing the day-one DLC idea to sell us one game as more than one product.
You are leaving out some actual necessary information. This info is being quoted without amplifying information as to why the Javik hooks were in the code to begin with.... If you look deeper at the issue with a fair and open mind you might just see that developers frequently want to do more in the game than they have time for. It is not unusual for projects to have parts trimmed out but saved for later use....it doesn't have to be nefarious to happen. Anyone who works in a professional environment should understand deadlines and cutoffs.....its more dificult to understand if your highest form of employment concerned a spatula to flip burgers with or mops but most people who have held jobs understand.
Ok Im done defending ME3 now, I have my own gripes about the game
If than 95% of the DLC was already in the game they should've given it for free. Better publishers and developers than EA/Bioware have done that before.
Companies like EA and Activision know if they release a terrible game from an existing franchise, it will still sell.
The real problem is that people will still buy products from a developer regardless of how shitty it is because they invested time and money in the previous games from that franchise. And they wan't to continue their gaming experience with that franchise.
Regardless of what players say, If Blizzard released Diablo 4 in five years time, there would be people lining up wanting to buy it on release day.
I honestly don't mind paying more to play games as enjoyable as Mass Effect 3. If anything, the trend towards splitting up games and selling bits of them will result in more effective communication between companies and gamers.
With an all-in-one box, the only message you can send with your dollars is 'Buy/No Buy' or 'Like/Dislike'. That's a pretty poor granularity. If the game is sold in multiple parts, say with more characters as one option, more story as another, and more weapons as a third, suddenly the company has real, actual numbers on what's worth delivering, and what people want.
The downside is if they discover that what 95% of the gamers want is X, and what 5% want is Y, if you're in the Y group you're going to start getting underserved. Until niche-targeted companies come out, etc, etc.
It's different, and not always good for any one particular consumer, but I'd argue that on the whole, more people will be happier.
I disagree. Effective communication between consumers and developers would be developers talking about their projects and keeping their fans updated, like what @TrentOster is doing via Twitter right now. Effective communication would be developers actively participating in forum discussions and doing something with fan feedback, not working with a hal-assed customer service system like EA's helpdesk. If you have been on the Bioware Social Network, you would see how daily new topics about technical issues pop up, especially concerning the multiplayer part of Mass Effect 3. And guess what? Nobody at EAware is doing anything to help out. You just gotta call to some or the other number and get automatic responses on how to handle your issue. If EA's so big and potent, why the hell wouldn't they invest in a customer help desk that works properly, at least? Also, with every patch they release for their games, only more bugs pop up and only more games crash. Because y'know, 'Cannot make a connection with the EA servers'. Whole the business practice of EA stinks.
Companies like EA and Activision know if they release a terrible game from an existing franchise, it will still sell.
The real problem is that people will still buy products from a developer regardless of how shitty it is because they invested time and money in the previous games from that franchise. And they wan't to continue their gaming experience with that franchise.
Regardless of what players say, If Blizzard released Diablo 4 in five years time, there would be people lining up wanting to buy it on release day.
Sadly, this is all too true. Game companies have discovered how passionate gamers actually are and now they're exploiting and searching for ways to turn this passion into shiny gold. And most people blindly fall for the bones they get thrown at them while not noticing the price tag on said bones...
The video gaming industry is a business like any other, the primary purpose of which is to make profit. If the marketplace doesn't like what a particular company is offering, it will sell poorly and meet a swift Darwinian end.
Fortunately, the technology is growing in leaps and bounds, and competition is robust, all of which pushes innovation forward and offers plenty of variety in products to choose from. All companies are driven to meet the consumer demand of the best possible value at the least expensive price-point. The ones that succeed thrive.
I can totally understand why DLC is being implemented. I'm surprised it has taken this long for video games. 'A la carte' is increasingly the way forward with digital entertainment.
@The_Guilty_Party In my experience it's less "These DLCs are what I want" but more "If I don't buy them all, my game will be incomplete". It's a stupid mindset of course, but there you go. Psychology and rationality do not always agree.
Companies like EA and Activision know if they release a terrible game from an existing franchise, it will still sell.
You have no idea how many NFS games I've bought simply because it's a NFS game. I don't play any other car racing game other than the NFS series, I don't even like car racing in general, but NFS, I'm there day one.
One day people will stop bitching about ME3 enough that I'll be able to play it and enjoy it. I've only had that since day 1 also.
Companies like EA and Activision know if they release a terrible game from an existing franchise, it will still sell.
You have no idea how many NFS games I've bought simply because it's a NFS game. I don't play any other car racing game other than the NFS series, I don't even like car racing in general, but NFS, I'm there day one.
One day people will stop bitching about ME3 enough that I'll be able to play it and enjoy it. I've only had that since day 1 also.
I for one actually hope the ranting won't stop. Gamers, and consumers in general, need to become more critical in their thinking and think about the product they're buying, more specifically the business strategies behind it. When I buy a puzzle game, I expect all of the pieces to be there in the box, not that I have to buy piece X or Y in a separate package in order to complete the whole puzzle. I know it's not really a good comparison, but I hope you all get the picture. It won't be long before game companies actually really start cutting essential content out of their games if the consumer just keeps an eye closed.
@Jolanthus : NFS has lost its essence ever since Hot Pursuit 2, with the one exception of recent games being the newest Hot Pursuit really.
I remembered NFS being exotic cars that you don't see ever in a lifetime in impossibly scenic tracks spanning across coastlines, huge mountains, great forests or futuristic cities. It was supposed to be the god of arcade racing.
Nowadays it's either tuner racing games with poor plots just to add some gameplay to it or racing car simulators.
I'm not trying to criticize what you like, far from it, but I LOVED NFS for many years, the first one was one of the first games I've ever played. But nowadays it seems just pretty much the same to me. Consider this more like a personal opinion so hopefully I didn't offend you. And if I did, I apologize.
@Cheesebelly No offence taken, I don't even know why I buy it. If I wanted a proper racing game, there are better ones out there. If I wanted something less serious, again there are better options out there.
If than 95% of the DLC was already in the game they should've given it for free. Better publishers and developers than EA/Bioware have done that before.
And that is a valid opinion and one I think you should be free to apply to any product you create, however other people who work on a project might just judge things a bit differently But everyone is different.
If than 95% of the DLC was already in the game they should've given it for free. Better publishers and developers than EA/Bioware have done that before.
And that is a valid opinion and one I think you should be free to apply to any product you create, however other people who work on a project might just judge things a bit differently But everyone is different.
why do i get the feeling you'd argue either side of the issue with equal gusto?
I really wouldn't. I think the people producing the work, the guys sweating to meet deadlines I think their business decisions are theirs to make, and I get crazy where I perceive there is a lack of understanding on how things work in the world....too many people have uninformed opinions and blather on and on telling other people how they should do things when the person complaining has zero experience in producing something. So I try to explain the Business world to the non-business people and I do the opposite to, I explain joe blow to the suits .....I guess its a function of my real life profession....Im technical but spend my time bridging the gap between suit and tech.... (Im not claiming anyone on this board blathers or is uninformed Im just using generalizations)
it doesn't help when there are whole scads of people who don't believe in intellectual property and ownership and that things are just there and should be free....
you know the issue isn't the dlc, it's not the content, it's the day one part of it. That's the one thing that always bothered me. i never cared for dlc but i understand some people can afford it and want it, so i won't argue that further. but to me, and let me know if i'm mistaken on this.
a car company releases a new car model, and the only way to get it is to pay for it in advance. They don't know how well it sell so will only make what people already pay for. so they go out and make all the cars, and on the day that they give out all the cars to the people who just bought it, they also release a new version of the car that fixes all the known problems with the car you just bought. Stuff that was known about in the making of the cars, and could have been fixed.
It strikes me as bad business. You want to release the dlc, wait for the game to be out for a few weeks, a month. As you stated, it wasn't important to the game, wasn't needed, so why not put it out at day one? Regardless of what happened, it felt like ea screwing the fans again, and after all this times, that's still what it feels like. That's why logic doesn't work, because it's a feeling, it's a matter of trust, as in i trust ea will screw their fans over at every chance they get.
i appreciate you trying to explain things and you've made some very excellent arguments. I respect you as a debater even if i don't agree with you.
When you buy a boxed game, the box, the disc, the manual (call it manual nowadays) and whatever else is inside should be yours by right. EVERYTHING. So you're basically free to burn, eat, burn AND eat the physical copy and what not, as long as you don't break copyrights and pirate it around, right?
So if there is a Day one DLC that you NEED to purchase on the physical copy... is that right? I mean, you paid for what you get in that box... but you don't get 100% of it all. the Prothean DLC is one of the things that was on the physical copy of Mass Effect 3 even if you didn't own it... but was it right that you didn't own it? That's my question now.
Sorry if I made little sense, am kind of having a slight (read as strong) headache XD
If (and Im not one of those people) You are someone who can afford to buy a really upscale car (such as a Brand New Custom Corvette) You place your order and give them your money and you eventually get the car several months later (the actual time of payment varies) and if it is discovered there is a Fix/upgrade that is needed for that model the day you get the car....You ARE SOL, unless there is a recall issued....I know this as I associate with people in business who actually CAN afford to do that kind of thing.
Thanks for the kind words though...usually Im more a stream of conciousness talker/poster and not really good at prepared debates
Well, I kinda had a thought on it : When you buy a boxed game, the box, the disc, the manual (call it manual nowadays) and whatever else is inside should be yours by right. EVERYTHING. So you're basically free to burn, eat, burn AND eat the physical copy and what not, as long as you don't break copyrights and pirate it around, right?
That's the thing though, you do not actually buy the game. You never own the game. You only ever get to buy the right to play it (in the manner that was intended by the developer). That's just another way I feel screwed over by the industry.
I didn't say it was illegal (which doesn't mean anything really, since the industry has a big hand in what is or isn't allowed), just that I don't like it.
@Humanoid_Taifun There are not a lot of legal options for people who develop software and other intellectual property to retain their rights..weather it is a CRPG code or a Novel or magazine article.
I don't think I should continue this discussion on the official board of a game developer. If you really must know my thoughts on the subject, you can send me a PM.
Comments
wrong, it gave alot of insight into the prothen mindset and culture that wasn't known before hand, such as the fact that they were slavers. the content actually put the game into a different perspective all together.
we're not going to see eye to eye on this bro. i think it was a cheap tactic to cash in on the fans, you think it was a legitimate business move, and in your eyes, a very successful one.
but all the fans they pissed off, it was a short term gain for a long term loss. i remember disgaea 2 for psp gave out the first dlc for free so that their fans could see what they offered and so that they wouldn't feel cheated, and it was a really nice move on their part.
hey no problems bro, in the end, we all like what we like. Some times it's quantifiable, or justifiable or rational and some times it is not, the important thing is...spend time doing what makes you happy and don't sweat the small shit
With an all-in-one box, the only message you can send with your dollars is 'Buy/No Buy' or 'Like/Dislike'. That's a pretty poor granularity. If the game is sold in multiple parts, say with more characters as one option, more story as another, and more weapons as a third, suddenly the company has real, actual numbers on what's worth delivering, and what people want.
The downside is if they discover that what 95% of the gamers want is X, and what 5% want is Y, if you're in the Y group you're going to start getting underserved. Until niche-targeted companies come out, etc, etc.
It's different, and not always good for any one particular consumer, but I'd argue that on the whole, more people will be happier.
nah, this is from when i was in the tomb of horrors and i played the aerie char, hoping to get back in. needed something to distract the demilich
The real problem is that people will still buy products from a developer regardless of how shitty it is because they invested time and money in the previous games from that franchise. And they wan't to continue their gaming experience with that franchise.
Regardless of what players say, If Blizzard released Diablo 4 in five years time, there would be people lining up wanting to buy it on release day.
Fortunately, the technology is growing in leaps and bounds, and competition is robust, all of which pushes innovation forward and offers plenty of variety in products to choose from. All companies are driven to meet the consumer demand of the best possible value at the least expensive price-point. The ones that succeed thrive.
I can totally understand why DLC is being implemented. I'm surprised it has taken this long for video games. 'A la carte' is increasingly the way forward with digital entertainment.
In my experience it's less "These DLCs are what I want" but more "If I don't buy them all, my game will be incomplete".
It's a stupid mindset of course, but there you go. Psychology and rationality do not always agree.
One day people will stop bitching about ME3 enough that I'll be able to play it and enjoy it. I've only had that since day 1 also.
I remembered NFS being exotic cars that you don't see ever in a lifetime in impossibly scenic tracks spanning across coastlines, huge mountains, great forests or futuristic cities. It was supposed to be the god of arcade racing.
Nowadays it's either tuner racing games with poor plots just to add some gameplay to it or racing car simulators.
I'm not trying to criticize what you like, far from it, but I LOVED NFS for many years, the first one was one of the first games I've ever played. But nowadays it seems just pretty much the same to me. Consider this more like a personal opinion so hopefully I didn't offend you. And if I did, I apologize.
I really wouldn't. I think the people producing the work, the guys sweating to meet deadlines
I think their business decisions are theirs to make, and I get crazy where I perceive there is a lack of understanding on how things work in the world....too many people have uninformed opinions and blather on and on telling other people how they should do things when the person complaining has zero experience in producing something. So I try to explain the Business world to the non-business people and I do the opposite to, I explain joe blow to the suits .....I guess its a function of my real life profession....Im technical but spend my time bridging the gap between suit and tech.... (Im not claiming anyone on this board blathers or is uninformed Im just using generalizations)
it doesn't help when there are whole scads of people who don't believe in intellectual property and ownership and that things are just there and should be free....
you know the issue isn't the dlc, it's not the content, it's the day one part of it. That's the one thing that always bothered me. i never cared for dlc but i understand some people can afford it and want it, so i won't argue that further. but to me, and let me know if i'm mistaken on this.
a car company releases a new car model, and the only way to get it is to pay for it in advance. They don't know how well it sell so will only make what people already pay for. so they go out and make all the cars, and on the day that they give out all the cars to the people who just bought it, they also release a new version of the car that fixes all the known problems with the car you just bought. Stuff that was known about in the making of the cars, and could have been fixed.
It strikes me as bad business. You want to release the dlc, wait for the game to be out for a few weeks, a month. As you stated, it wasn't important to the game, wasn't needed, so why not put it out at day one? Regardless of what happened, it felt like ea screwing the fans again, and after all this times, that's still what it feels like. That's why logic doesn't work, because it's a feeling, it's a matter of trust, as in i trust ea will screw their fans over at every chance they get.
i appreciate you trying to explain things and you've made some very excellent arguments. I respect you as a debater even if i don't agree with you.
When you buy a boxed game, the box, the disc, the manual (call it manual nowadays) and whatever else is inside should be yours by right. EVERYTHING. So you're basically free to burn, eat, burn AND eat the physical copy and what not, as long as you don't break copyrights and pirate it around, right?
So if there is a Day one DLC that you NEED to purchase on the physical copy... is that right? I mean, you paid for what you get in that box... but you don't get 100% of it all. the Prothean DLC is one of the things that was on the physical copy of Mass Effect 3 even if you didn't own it... but was it right that you didn't own it? That's my question now.
Sorry if I made little sense, am kind of having a slight (read as strong) headache XD
Thanks for the kind words though...usually Im more a stream of conciousness talker/poster and not really good at prepared debates
That's just another way I feel screwed over by the industry.
There are not a lot of legal options for people who develop software and other intellectual property to retain their rights..weather it is a CRPG code or a Novel or magazine article.