MSim


If people don't complain they will continue to pull stunts like this, not the first game developer to do this. They should make day 1 DLC to anyone who buys ME3 on the PC, i could see charging console users due to greedy M$ and Sony.

That is part of the problem, M$ and Sony want money for it and if they don't charge PC players then console (the larger market for ME3) will get all bent out of shape

Brad_Hawthorne

wdflyer

IMO the bottom line is if you don't like, don't buy it, no one is forcing anyone to purchase anything.
If you choose do buythe game then be willing to live with it.  The companies behind computer games are commercial businesses driven by profit, of course they are going to try to charge extra for stuff when they know people out there will shell out the money for it. 

In many cases DLC is not optional. People playing BF3 originally purchased it for $60, then found out they need a $20 map pack to be competitive, then coming up shortly they'll need another $20 map pack. So they'll spend $100 on a game that in November of this year will be on Origin winter sale for $19.99 as the game of the year bundle with all DLC included. My butt hurts just thinking about it. People didn't buy BF3 knowing that DLC would be mandatory. It's a bait and switch scam. This is the same for ME3 as EA is pulling the puppet strings as distributor.

But this is about ME3 DLC, not BF3's and if you've played any one of ME2's DLC you'll know none of it has been even close to necessary far from it in fact.

ARCTIC_EAGLE

mblystone


Uhhh, the first post on the thread is about DLC.  The thread(this thread), is about, how bioware/EA went...
hold on...
too far...
with...
hold on...
dlc...
Is that more your speed?

Actually its about ME3's DLC (made by Bioware, published by EA) is going to far. Yet again you refuse to respond to my first post, is it because you can't come up with anything intelligent to say?

What exactly am I supposed to be responding to amongst your apologist tripe?  Between your first and last posts, I haven't seen one cognizant point that justifies the EA/Bioware nickel and dime fest here. 
 
I don't mean this as an insult, but you are not an adult, are you?  Maybe you should go find one and have them help you review the discussion with regard to what all has been said thus far.

ARCTIC_EAGLE

Brad_Hawthorne
 

wdflyer

IMO the bottom line is if you don't like, don't buy it, no one is forcing anyone to purchase anything.
If you choose do buythe game then be willing to live with it.  The companies behind computer games are commercial businesses driven by profit, of course they are going to try to charge extra for stuff when they know people out there will shell out the money for it. 

In many cases DLC is not optional. People playing BF3 originally purchased it for $60, then found out they need a $20 map pack to be competitive, then coming up shortly they'll need another $20 map pack. So they'll spend $100 on a game that in November of this year will be on Origin winter sale for $19.99 as the game of the year bundle with all DLC included. My butt hurts just thinking about it. People didn't buy BF3 knowing that DLC would be mandatory. It's a bait and switch scam. This is the same for ME3 as EA is pulling the puppet strings as distributor.

But this is about ME3 DLC, not BF3's and if you've played any one of ME2's DLC you'll know none of it has been even close to necessary far from it in fact.

EA has never been so heavy handed in the past with BioWare as it is now. The jury is still out on just how bad ME3 DLC will be for critical game play. EA tries to make as much off of DLC as they do off of the original sale. You'll see in the end that ME3 will most likely have 3-4 $20 DLCs at the very least equaling the $60 original cost of the standard game. If that's not milking the customer I donno what is... It's been stated in the thread that people buy DLC because they want to. I see no creditable evidence that their motivation is want and not need. A $30-40 game is being sold for $60 with another $60 of DLC on top of it.

Brad_Hawthorne

ARCTIC_EAGLE

Brad_Hawthorne
 

wdflyer

IMO the bottom line is if you don't like, don't buy it, no one is forcing anyone to purchase anything.
If you choose do buythe game then be willing to live with it.  The companies behind computer games are commercial businesses driven by profit, of course they are going to try to charge extra for stuff when they know people out there will shell out the money for it. 

In many cases DLC is not optional. People playing BF3 originally purchased it for $60, then found out they need a $20 map pack to be competitive, then coming up shortly they'll need another $20 map pack. So they'll spend $100 on a game that in November of this year will be on Origin winter sale for $19.99 as the game of the year bundle with all DLC included. My butt hurts just thinking about it. People didn't buy BF3 knowing that DLC would be mandatory. It's a bait and switch scam. This is the same for ME3 as EA is pulling the puppet strings as distributor.

But this is about ME3 DLC, not BF3's and if you've played any one of ME2's DLC you'll know none of it has been even close to necessary far from it in fact.

EA has never been so heavy handed in the past with BioWare as it is now. The jury is still out on just how bad ME3 DLC will be for critical game play. EA tries to make as much off of DLC as they do off of the original sale. You'll see in the end that ME3 will most likely have 3-4 $20 DLCs at the very least equaling the $60 original cost of the standard game. If that's not milking the customer I donno what is... It's been stated in the thread that people buy DLC because they want to. I see no creditable evidence that their motivation is want and not need. A $30-40 game is being sold for $60 with another $60 of DLC on top of it.

ME2 playable DLC: $35
ME2 Cerberus activation: $15
None of ME2's DLC, as I said, was a "need" nor was the Cerberus activation so I don't see the problem. People want free material because they think they are entitled to it, you paid $60 for the game, that's what you get, nothing more. Now if they said "Well to play ME3 mp you need to spend another $15 for an unlock pass and then you need to spend another $15 for dialogue options in SP" then I'd be mad, but to say here's some DLC on day 1 that's not important to the story (because it was made without the DLC in mind, assuming its like ME2) I don't see the issue. If you don't like it don't buy it. Besides Activision is far worse than EA (same game every year from 2007 till the year 3,000 plus COD elite and map packs (3 or so maps) that cost $15?) come on.

ARCTIC_EAGLE

Brad_Hawthorne

ARCTIC_EAGLE

Brad_Hawthorne
 

wdflyer

IMO the bottom line is if you don't like, don't buy it, no one is forcing anyone to purchase anything.
If you choose do buythe game then be willing to live with it.  The companies behind computer games are commercial businesses driven by profit, of course they are going to try to charge extra for stuff when they know people out there will shell out the money for it. 

In many cases DLC is not optional. People playing BF3 originally purchased it for $60, then found out they need a $20 map pack to be competitive, then coming up shortly they'll need another $20 map pack. So they'll spend $100 on a game that in November of this year will be on Origin winter sale for $19.99 as the game of the year bundle with all DLC included. My butt hurts just thinking about it. People didn't buy BF3 knowing that DLC would be mandatory. It's a bait and switch scam. This is the same for ME3 as EA is pulling the puppet strings as distributor.

But this is about ME3 DLC, not BF3's and if you've played any one of ME2's DLC you'll know none of it has been even close to necessary far from it in fact.

EA has never been so heavy handed in the past with BioWare as it is now. The jury is still out on just how bad ME3 DLC will be for critical game play. EA tries to make as much off of DLC as they do off of the original sale. You'll see in the end that ME3 will most likely have 3-4 $20 DLCs at the very least equaling the $60 original cost of the standard game. If that's not milking the customer I donno what is... It's been stated in the thread that people buy DLC because they want to. I see no creditable evidence that their motivation is want and not need. A $30-40 game is being sold for $60 with another $60 of DLC on top of it.

ME2 playable DLC: $35
ME2 Cerberus activation: $15
None of ME2's DLC, as I said, was a "need" nor was the Cerberus activation so I don't see the problem. People want free material because they think they are entitled to it, you paid $60 for the game, that's what you get, nothing more. Now if they said "Well to play ME3 mp you need to spend another $15 for an unlock pass and then you need to spend another $15 for dialogue options in SP" then I'd be mad, but to say here's some DLC on day 1 that's not important to the story (because it was made without the DLC in mind, assuming its like ME2) I don't see the issue. If you don't like it don't buy it. Besides Activision is far worse than EA (same game every year from 2007 till the year 3,000 plus COD elite and map packs (3 or so maps) that cost $15?) come on.

You missed my point about EA being more heavy handed with DLC now than then. I fully expect that DLC is going to be $20 each and penalize you in some manner if you don't have it. EA is setting that president with BF3 which will no doubt extend to ME3 and future games.

Brad_Hawthorne

ARCTIC_EAGLE

Brad_Hawthorne

ARCTIC_EAGLE

Brad_Hawthorne
 

wdflyer

IMO the bottom line is if you don't like, don't buy it, no one is forcing anyone to purchase anything.
If you choose do buythe game then be willing to live with it.  The companies behind computer games are commercial businesses driven by profit, of course they are going to try to charge extra for stuff when they know people out there will shell out the money for it. 

In many cases DLC is not optional. People playing BF3 originally purchased it for $60, then found out they need a $20 map pack to be competitive, then coming up shortly they'll need another $20 map pack. So they'll spend $100 on a game that in November of this year will be on Origin winter sale for $19.99 as the game of the year bundle with all DLC included. My butt hurts just thinking about it. People didn't buy BF3 knowing that DLC would be mandatory. It's a bait and switch scam. This is the same for ME3 as EA is pulling the puppet strings as distributor.

But this is about ME3 DLC, not BF3's and if you've played any one of ME2's DLC you'll know none of it has been even close to necessary far from it in fact.

EA has never been so heavy handed in the past with BioWare as it is now. The jury is still out on just how bad ME3 DLC will be for critical game play. EA tries to make as much off of DLC as they do off of the original sale. You'll see in the end that ME3 will most likely have 3-4 $20 DLCs at the very least equaling the $60 original cost of the standard game. If that's not milking the customer I donno what is... It's been stated in the thread that people buy DLC because they want to. I see no creditable evidence that their motivation is want and not need. A $30-40 game is being sold for $60 with another $60 of DLC on top of it.

ME2 playable DLC: $35
ME2 Cerberus activation: $15
None of ME2's DLC, as I said, was a "need" nor was the Cerberus activation so I don't see the problem. People want free material because they think they are entitled to it, you paid $60 for the game, that's what you get, nothing more. Now if they said "Well to play ME3 mp you need to spend another $15 for an unlock pass and then you need to spend another $15 for dialogue options in SP" then I'd be mad, but to say here's some DLC on day 1 that's not important to the story (because it was made without the DLC in mind, assuming its like ME2) I don't see the issue. If you don't like it don't buy it. Besides Activision is far worse than EA (same game every year from 2007 till the year 3,000 plus COD elite and map packs (3 or so maps) that cost $15?) come on.

You missed my point about EA being more heavy handed with DLC now than then. I fully expect that DLC is going to be $20 each and penalize you in some manner if you don't have it.

Could be, but its still hypothetical, I mean if people are concerned about that then just wait to buy. I mean there's no point in getting bent out of shape over something that may or may not be true, its like complaining that EVGA's new layout is terrible yet you haven't seen it. I agree there is a concern for that but with BF3 they made it clear from the start that if you bought the Limited Edition you'd get the DLC free, so I didn't have a problem with it.

That's exactly what I will be doing...waiting.  I can pick this up a couple months down the road for 30 bucks less and still enjoy the story. If the DLC is ridiculous, I just won't get it.

Rolling over and shutting up is what shills, apologists and EA would like us to do, yes, however, speaking up about issues like this, and letting publishers know gamers don't all find it acceptable is one of the only ways to enact change.
 
People like you eagle, are too used to rolling over, and that hurts everybody.  It tells companies like EA that this kind of crap is easy to get away with and profitable. 
 
People sent bioware a message with DA2, sales dropped off a cliff within a week after release.  I hope people send a similar message with ME3.

Xarzi


Personally I don't think the man trully understands game development. Saying that gamers are entitled to anything developed post launch is idiotic. I am studying game design and simulation and the process for expanded content starts before the game is finished and ready to ship. Sometimes is even done before it ships. This is so that developers can keep a constant supply of content flowing.

Gamers are entitled to nothing. And as for how important he is making it. Thats idiotic. It's a stupid proteus. I love Mass Effect. I have bought every game on launch and played them all. But it's just a character. If you want it go buy it. Thats how the world works. If you don't like I am sorry but you do not have to buy it.

It has nothing to do with cutting content. He is misrepresenting the process and only making an ass of himself.

Production proces != design intent.
 
Argument is from the design intent and by design it is set up to nickle and dime the end user while detracting from resources that could have been applied to developing the core game sooner/better/less bugs.
 
Just because the process has become an industry standard doesn't make it right or ethical at all.

While I love the Mass Effect series and want to play ME3, I will be waiting for a sale on this one.

I've had too many complaints with the responses in this thread as well as TOS violations so we're locking it down.