![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Mass Effect DLC Character "IS" On The Disc
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
I'd actualy ordered this game from Amazon this morning, but after reading this thread i've decided to cancel it (for now at least).
Perhaps the dlc is no big deal, and the game is good fun without it, and it's just icing on the cake, but without reading spoilers I can't be sure, but it's clearly more than a skin pack i can ignore, or perhaps the 'whole' game is worth retail+dlc, but it just feels like they're being sneaky about it.
Do they still have the bullshit 'bioware points' system now its on origin? or can I just buy it? That was the thing that put me off the ME2 DLC.
Either way, I've realised I don't need this game, and amazon reminded me i've still not played DE:HR (not to mention i've still got to play through FO:NV, DA:A and Skyrim sat on my desk) so this one can wait untill a GOTY edition comes out.
Just have to avoid spoilers
Perhaps the dlc is no big deal, and the game is good fun without it, and it's just icing on the cake, but without reading spoilers I can't be sure, but it's clearly more than a skin pack i can ignore, or perhaps the 'whole' game is worth retail+dlc, but it just feels like they're being sneaky about it.
Do they still have the bullshit 'bioware points' system now its on origin? or can I just buy it? That was the thing that put me off the ME2 DLC.
Either way, I've realised I don't need this game, and amazon reminded me i've still not played DE:HR (not to mention i've still got to play through FO:NV, DA:A and Skyrim sat on my desk) so this one can wait untill a GOTY edition comes out.
Just have to avoid spoilers
so this one can wait untill a GOTY edition comes out.
Just have to avoid spoilers
Aside from the ME2 version on the PS3 with certain DLC there hasn't been a GOTY version of ME games.
Age has little to do with it. I am 26 now for reference, but SNES/N64. Yea you can compare them.
Because this is in reference to say that gaming is not better than it was in the 90s, which is bullshit. Just from a technical aspect the size of games has increased, but games now a days have mulitplayer offerings, bigger stories etc and technically for big blockbusters you are paying less due to inflation.
But if you want to compare load up your favorite N64 game. After a few minutes you might wonder how you paid 70 bucks for that game back in the day. Cartridge aside I don't think anyone cares about the medium the game comes on. If cartridges were more expensive back in the day then all that happened was the consumer ended up paying more.
Your retail argument is flawed too. All the pricing wars has just shifted to online retailers. Look at Best Buy/Amazon/Walmart online. Amazon heavily discounts certain games at release time and with services that discount games used such as Gamestop/Hastings/Gamefly you actually have more competition than you did in the 90s. Hell even eBay is an option now.
And the income statement is also flawed. Sure you have income levels that mimic 1996 levels, but the cost of all other entertainment has gone up relative to video games. So a video game is actually a cheaper option now than a family of 4 going to the movies. And with the invention of the Wii and certain family games it is more prevalent.
So you can argue incomes all you want, but there are more gamers today than there was in the 90s and there are stronger game sales as well.
I'd actualy ordered this game from Amazon this morning, but after reading this thread i've decided to cancel it (for now at least).
Perhaps the dlc is no big deal, and the game is good fun without it, and it's just icing on the cake, but without reading spoilers I can't be sure, but it's clearly more than a skin pack i can ignore, or perhaps the 'whole' game is worth retail+dlc, but it just feels like they're being sneaky about it.
Do they still have the bullshit 'bioware points' system now its on origin? or can I just buy it? That was the thing that put me off the ME2 DLC.
Either way, I've realised I don't need this game, and amazon reminded me i've still not played DE:HR (not to mention i've still got to play through FO:NV, DA:A and Skyrim sat on my desk) so this one can wait untill a GOTY edition comes out.
Just have to avoid spoilers
Yes, there's still the Bioware points system through Origin. If you're familiar with ME2 and its initial DLC (Zaeed), without getting into specifics, ME3's launch DLC is conceptually similar.
DeathPrincess
Fully [H]
- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Messages
- 18,205
Becuase people just don't seem to be able to grasp there is no law which states how game content is delivered. Providers of a game or whatever have the exclusive right to decide how they sell their IP, how they monetize it, or what freebies they give. They also get to decide how/when the develop extra content.
They already can do whatever they like with it, it is not illegal, it is not even immoral as never was this "extra" game content promised that wasn't delivered. Just because it has some of the content on the disk means a total of 0, whatever you views on it. You still do not automatically own this content.
As annoying as day 1 DLC is, seriously, if you took this to a court of law what would be your argument on a moral or legal ground?
Judge: So why are you suing this publisher?
Purschaser: When they were developing a product they also were developing extra content to sell to people I discovered while searching a disk...and so...I deserve all of it because it was being done during the game development and...and...so I own the game so I own all the possible game content even though it's not actually part of the edition I bought!!!
Judge: ....
Do you automatically own the extended editions of the LOTR films because it was filmed at the same time? Or the directors cut of any film? Do you automatically own the ultimate editions of windows products because that content was planned from early on? Or development artwork? Or the bonus tracks on special edition albums?
Publishers literally can do whateever they want, because they own the stuff, everyone else is entitled to 0 more than they are given for the price publishers decide to give it. Being optomistic theres not really much wiggle room on the issue, being realistic there isn't any. The only actual defence is to buy things which you deem worthwhile and not buy things you feel not worthwhile. It isn't people being stupid, its people not seeing a $10 purchase in the same light as youself and others. To them the purchase is worthwhile, to you it isn't. If enough deem it not worthwhile enough to purchase then the publisher will change strategy. But as enough people have apparently seen worth in paying a little extra for whatever reason you have most likely already been overruled.
Still, I care not, bioware don't really make anything of interest to me, so I value it at less than what they ask and don't buy. If you think it isn't worth the asking price, don't buy it either. Arguing that content developers have no rights to control their content in ways they deem fit isn't going to get very far and doesn't make very much sense.
Becuase people just don't seem to be able to grasp there is no law which states how game content is delivered. Providers of a game or whatever have the exclusive right to decide how they sell their IP, how they monetize it, or what freebies they give. They also get to decide how/when the develop extra content.
They already can do whatever they like with it, it is not illegal, it is not even immoral as never was this "extra" game content promised that wasn't delivered. Just because it has some of the content on the disk means a total of 0, whatever you views on it. You still do not automatically own this content.
As annoying as day 1 DLC is, seriously, if you took this to a court of law what would be your argument on a moral or legal ground?
Judge: So why are you suing this publisher?
Purschaser: When they were developing a product they also were developing extra content to sell to people I discovered while searching a disk...and so...I deserve all of it because it was being done during the game development and...and...so I own the game so I own all the possible game content even though it's not actually part of the edition I bought!!!
Judge: ....
Do you automatically own the extended editions of the LOTR films because it was filmed at the same time? Or the directors cut of any film? Do you automatically own the ultimate editions of windows products because that content was planned from early on? Or development artwork? Or the bonus tracks on special edition albums?
Publishers literally can do whateever they want, because they own the stuff, everyone else is entitled to 0 more than they are given for the price publishers decide to give it. Being optomistic theres not really much wiggle room on the issue, being realistic there isn't any. The only actual defence is to buy things which you deem worthwhile and not buy things you feel not worthwhile. It isn't people being stupid, its people not seeing a $10 purchase in the same light as youself and others. To them the purchase is worthwhile, to you it isn't. If enough deem it not worthwhile enough to purchase then the publisher will change strategy. But as enough people have apparently seen worth in paying a little extra for whatever reason you have most likely already been overruled.
Still, I care not, bioware don't really make anything of interest to me, so I value it at less than what they ask and don't buy. If you think it isn't worth the asking price, don't buy it either. Arguing that content developers have no rights to control their content in ways they deem fit isn't going to get very far and doesn't make very much sense.
The argument against it is deception and lying. Publishers can do whatever the hell they want with thier IP. Don't give a crap. What most people care about is when they sell you their IP and then they don't give it to you. That's the difference. People thought they were buying the full game, not part of the game. Does it say on the box that there is content in the box you are buying, that you can't access without paying more money?
Becuase people just don't seem to be able to grasp there is no law which states how game content is delivered. Providers of a game or whatever have the exclusive right to decide how they sell their IP, how they monetize it, or what freebies they give. They also get to decide how/when the develop extra content.
They already can do whatever they like with it, it is not illegal, it is not even immoral as never was this "extra" game content promised that wasn't delivered. Just because it has some of the content on the disk means a total of 0, whatever you views on it. You still do not automatically own this content.
As annoying as day 1 DLC is, seriously, if you took this to a court of law what would be your argument on a moral or legal ground?
Judge: So why are you suing this publisher?
Purschaser: When they were developing a product they also were developing extra content to sell to people I discovered while searching a disk...and so...I deserve all of it because it was being done during the game development and...and...so I own the game so I own all the possible game content even though it's not actually part of the edition I bought!!!
Judge: ....
Do you automatically own the extended editions of the LOTR films because it was filmed at the same time? Or the directors cut of any film? Do you automatically own the ultimate editions of windows products because that content was planned from early on? Or development artwork? Or the bonus tracks on special edition albums?
Publishers literally can do whateever they want, because they own the stuff, everyone else is entitled to 0 more than they are given for the price publishers decide to give it. Being optomistic theres not really much wiggle room on the issue, being realistic there isn't any. The only actual defence is to buy things which you deem worthwhile and not buy things you feel not worthwhile. It isn't people being stupid, its people not seeing a $10 purchase in the same light as youself and others. To them the purchase is worthwhile, to you it isn't. If enough deem it not worthwhile enough to purchase then the publisher will change strategy. But as enough people have apparently seen worth in paying a little extra for whatever reason you have most likely already been overruled.
Still, I care not, bioware don't really make anything of interest to me, so I value it at less than what they ask and don't buy. If you think it isn't worth the asking price, don't buy it either. Arguing that content developers have no rights to control their content in ways they deem fit isn't going to get very far and doesn't make very much sense.
I see what your saying. I think you may have misinterpreted my point. Very true publishers are not breaking any laws and they have a right to do what they want with their product. My argument is that people shouldn't just bend over and take it. They damn sure shouldn't defend this behavior.
The argument is a moot point though. It is already been revealed that this hack only gets you the character in your party and that the dialog choices etc and the story for the character are on the DLC that you pay for.
That being said trying to get a publisher to admit that the content was actually part of the game vs developed afterwards? Good luck. That will never happen.
I think the time argument is bullshit. You have day 1 DLC, but what if it was month 1 DLC? Suddenly everyones opinions change.
Shalafi
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2009
- Messages
- 22,956
New Mona Lisa I made in MS Paint to reflect this new trend.
1) http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
2) Enter 49.99 in the first box
3) Enter 1992 in the second box
4) Click the button
(Reason for 1992: Street Fighter 2 was released for the NES in 1992, and it's listed in the "New Title" section; if you feel uncomfortable using 1992 feel free to use 1993, the final number won't change much)
The result should be $49.99 in 1992 dollars is $76.70 in 2010 dollars.
This argument isn't limited to just this game. It's about what use to be in the box, is no longer in the box.
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,107
New Mona Lisa I made in MS Paint to reflect this new trend.
Nice, gonna have to save this pic for later use.
Some games never do the GOTY, or Complete Edition.
Not that it matters for ME3. It requires Origin.
Shalafi
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2009
- Messages
- 22,956
Glad you like it, I feel a little bit bummed that we don't have the original model of PC gaming retail (Steam is a vast improvement, I'm referring more to the pricing scheme of things), and we would be in a better place, what, with all this hardware that we have that goes unused because game developers won't make games that take advantage of our hardware because of the limitations of consoles.
You can't prove that though. So you are argument is a moot point. There is no basis.
Has the publisher came out and admitted that they developed this side story for the character and it was part of the main game?
No they didn't. Only the character has been found has part of the main game. Lots of games feature characters that are removed at the last minute. I doubt anyone would have cared to play another character without a single dialog option or back story.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,897
Do you really think the publisher would admit they pulled the content out of the game in order to sell it separately? Come on, use your brain.
Of course it can't be proven but the evidence strongly suggests it.
FoxhoundOp
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2003
- Messages
- 1,129
It's nice to see that billion dollar corporations have a volunteer army of useful idiots to act as apologists for their anti-consumer practices.
No they won't and it is impossible to prove.
I looked back on the games I bought in the last 20 years and even without DLC games still have more re playability than they did 10-20 years ago.
That being said if you are upset about it...don't buy the games. Hell games are way way way cheaper to rent.
When I was growing up games were like 7-10 bucks a week to rent. If you rented the entire month you would end up spending around 40 bucks to rent one game at a time.
Now a days Redbox is the same price sans any membership fee and you can rent per night so you don't have to commit to a 10 dollar a week rental if the game is shit.
And Gamefly is 15 bucks a month.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,897
I guess I'm more of a PC gamer so I think about it in terms of the PC version, whereas it seems like you are referring more to consoles (since you can't "rent" a game on PC anymore)
I'm not sure I totally agree about the replayability of current games. Sure, there are some outliers like the Elder Scrolls games and the Fallout series, but more often than not we get stuff like CoD where the single player has virtually no replayability. Companies use multiplayer these days to justify replay value, but just throwing MP on there doesn't automatically make it worthwhile.
In regards to Mass Effect, I personally don't see any reason to replay the games, though I know other people have played through them more than once, so I guess it's subjective.
The point, you're missing it.
I don't have to prove the company pulled crap out of the main game to sell as DLC, they've done it for me by releasing zero day DLC.
Fallout and Elder Scrolls games are recent. Hell they are this console generation. I am not sure why I have to repeat myself, but go load back up games from the SNES days.
Are you telling games like Mortal Kombat 2, which retailed for around 50 dollars has more re playability of the current Mortal Kombat with online play etc?
There is tons of reasons to replay ME at least once. I did. In fact I am playing the whole series right now.
And it sucks you can't rent, but I have made numerous threads showing how PC gaming is not cheaper than console gaming and I game on PC the most, of course I only play games that are for the PC like SC2 etc.
So you can prove that they developed the game with the characters mission in tact and they said months later "hey lets take this out of the game and sell it as DLC"
vs
They completed the game, "hey Jims team is sitting around doing nothing for the next few months instead of laying half that team off (which happens now a days with developers) they said lets have Jims team develop DLC content. Hell we talked about that Javik character and we tested him in the game, but we never had a story for him so we never completed it. Why don't they develop a story line around that character?"
Hell Bioware has even said they released it as day 1 so that people who wanted to play it would play it the first time through.
I am all for getting the point. I never buy DLC because I can't resell it, but for people who want to play the whole story bad enough I don't see why the 10 dollars would be an issue.
It wouldn't
How come no one makes a big deal out of Assassins Creed games? Same multi player, fucking marginal at best 6-8 hour story line and since 2 has came out every year at 60 bucks?
What about that bullshit? Oh wait the last one reviewers said was shitty and people passed it to wait for massive price drops which came around Christmas time when the game was 30 bucks.
Its call money talks. If you don't like something don't buy it.
Content they develop before the launch of the game should be included in the game period. I don't who's team develops it. I don't care if they put a bunch of people in a closet and lable them the DLC team. Content that is developed before the launch should be included in the game, period.
Why do you think no one bought AC2 or AC3?
I didn't buy it. I'm now encouraging others not to buy it. But evidently, that's only ok with you, if we encourage your ideas and not mine.
Content they develop before the launch of the game should be included in the game period. I don't who's team develops it. I don't care if they put a bunch of people in a closet and lable them the DLC team. Content that is developed before the launch should be included in the game, period.
Why do you think no one bought AC2 or AC3?
I didn't buy it. I'm now encouraging others not to buy it. But evidently, that's only ok with you, if we encourage your ideas and not mine.
That is your opinion, but plenty of DLC is develop before launch because games now a days have longer advertising campaigns. Game studios are bigger and marketing is a bigger part of gaming because:
1. More games are developed now a days
2. Games have bigger budgets
3. Game studios are bigger (more developers)
4. Bigger audiences for gaming.
Hell I bet just about every game now a days have DLC that is development prelaunch. Just look at all capcom games. Wouldn't surprise me if Skyrim DLC is already completed and they are just looking to put the DLC out at a later date.
People bought AC2 and AC3 or else there wouldn't have been an AC 4 and now AC 5. So that is pretty much a fact.
You can convince people to not buy the game. I don't work for bioware. I don't really care. I am just punching holes in your conspiracy argument.
FoxhoundOp
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2003
- Messages
- 1,129
What I'm wondering is when "shut the fuck up" became a part of capitalism? There seems to be a group of people who are hellbent in quieting any dissent towards game companies by telling people "Shut the fuck up and don't buy it" as if that's the only recourse we have as customers. It's an important one (the most important) but being vocal about what we don't like is just as valid a strategy. I can understand it from parties who have a vested interest in making sure people open their wallets and ask questions later, (EA, paid off reviewers, etc) but why the polarization amongst gamers who all want the same thing at the end of the day? What's wrong with people saying "hey, I don't think I'm getting a good deal for my money" and sounding that war cry all over the Internet. How do you stand to benefit by shutting up people who may not think it's fair for a developer to release a game with $10 DLC on the day of it's release? Are you afraid developers may just stop releasing DLC altogether, that they'll throw up a middle finger and say, "fuck you, we're not making games anymore"?
So you agree they aren't selling you the whole game they developed.
You're not punching holes in anything but your own arguments.
Nope I am saying that they plan to finish a game according to a time line schedule, they test and certify it etc. Then they promote it for upwards of 6 months. In that time they are finishing up test etc.
In those 1-3 month gaps they may have instead of putting the team on other projects it would be better for them just to create additional content that didn't make it into the game.
From what I understand the content isn't integral to the main story line, Sorta like how bring down the sky wasn't integral and how Kasumi Goto in ME2 wasn't really a main part of the storyline.
IE she has a small section in ME3: http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Kasumi_Goto
And I am not telling anyone to shut the fuck up. If you don't like something bitch about it. At the end of the day your best recourse will be to just not spend money.
It is like complaining about gas prices. At the end of the day if everyone stopped driving there would be no speculated market.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,897
I agree with this. If it's developed for the game before launch, it should be classified as part of the original launch content. DLC should be reserved for additional content, i.e. content that was not developed before the game released.
The whole concept of "day 1 DLC" is retarded. Even if they had released the game without this and then sold it a week later as DLC it wouldn't have been quite as insulting as having it on day 1. Though, there is also the issue of the content being on the disc at launch so there is no real excuse for that, either.
See this is where I disagree:
I hate yearly refreshes, but I did buy COD MW3 this year because a lot of my friends played it. But see AC. Games are about 6-8 hours in length and really do not progress any story line. See the last AC game.
But alas I think it is impossible to conclude day 1 vs week 1 vs month 1. It is just a slippery slope. People I think will still make the same argument.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,897
From what I've read it seems the day 1 DLC for ME3 *is* fairly integral to the storyline, in a way that if you didn't have it you would be missing out in a major way.
Also, your argument about them making "additional content that didn't make it into the game" doesn't work for this example, because it was released on day 1 and the files were on the disc. In that sense it absolutely "made it into the game" on launch, they just wanted to nickle and dime customers, plain and simple.
Not sure about the first part. Bioware said it didn't, but who knows. Someone who has played it with Jarvis and without could chime in here.
The character was on the disc, but the mission files and many many many speech dialog files are missing. You are downloading a 600 mb pack.
Do you think that is all blank data?
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,897
Well, you can take this for what it's worth, but:
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1038493968&postcount=241
If everything except some art assets like audio and video files are on the disc already, that is "in the game" IMO. Not including a few files to make it look like it's this "bonus" content is a nice troll attempt but it doesn't hide the fact that the release game seems to be designed with this "bonus" character in mind.
Ok I change my stance. You are right in this case it is bullshit. I was not aware in my research. Thank you for pointing that out. I have no problem admitting I was wrong in this case.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,897
It's no problem. Honestly I don't know if that post is accurate, but it wouldn't surprise me.
If it is accurate. Like I said I don't have the PC version. Time will sort out the issue, but assuming all that stuff is actually on the disc it is a bullshit cash grab.
That's actually some of the worst logic I've ever seen. Me convincing a 100 people not to buy the game is much more effective then me not buying the game. They will never notice a single person not buying the game, especially if he doesn't vocalize why.
Second, most people can't simply stop driving. It's not that far from telling people, if everyone stopped eating, the price of food would go down.
If you want to carry that cross go right ahead. I am all for posting negative reviews about things, but something like taking up a personal crusade to not buy a video game...yea I have better ways to spend my time.
PreOmegaZero
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2002
- Messages
- 4,013
No, they'd just stop making as MUCH food.
Just like RAM, LCD and other electronics components have been price fixed through factory shutdowns and other means to keep supply/demand levels in check.
I think I'm officially done with this thread now. Maybe more. Pissing in the wind just equates to smelly pants sometimes.
ta_erog
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2008
- Messages
- 192
First the DLC is not on the disk, I have looked and most of the assets are not there. Some are but just a very few pertaining to the basic character and that is it (the mission and dialog are not there)
I have to agree with roaf85 here, My day job is testing software and we often have features taken out because we can't guarantee it will be fully integrated and tested at RR.
And some times the features are given to a partner group for parallel / or later development. Regardless if the Feature takes longer or they pull in the schedule it is never reintegrated to the main till after release. (this may or may not be the case but if it is . .it is common)
Even if this is not the case, selling additional content is simply a business model becoming more common with consoles and not PC games. The game is their product and they can sell it in any way they seem fit. (there are long lists of non game programs that require additional purchases for additional features or feature sets - so the model has been around for a long time preceding gaming. )
Also, this DLC was part of the CE bonus. So it has a use as bonus material for the people the bought the Collectors addition.
being MAD over it is rather childish and in this case the additional mission and character is not vital and just a ok/fair add on. Interesting but FAR from vital. and in the end it is only a game . .
I kind of find it funny that people wast so much time and effort railing over something so insane, and so out of there ability to fully understand or change.
I have to agree with roaf85 here, My day job is testing software and we often have features taken out because we can't guarantee it will be fully integrated and tested at RR.
And some times the features are given to a partner group for parallel / or later development. Regardless if the Feature takes longer or they pull in the schedule it is never reintegrated to the main till after release. (this may or may not be the case but if it is . .it is common)
Even if this is not the case, selling additional content is simply a business model becoming more common with consoles and not PC games. The game is their product and they can sell it in any way they seem fit. (there are long lists of non game programs that require additional purchases for additional features or feature sets - so the model has been around for a long time preceding gaming. )
Also, this DLC was part of the CE bonus. So it has a use as bonus material for the people the bought the Collectors addition.
being MAD over it is rather childish and in this case the additional mission and character is not vital and just a ok/fair add on. Interesting but FAR from vital. and in the end it is only a game . .
I kind of find it funny that people wast so much time and effort railing over something so insane, and so out of there ability to fully understand or change.
Evidently not. You've been spending your time arguing with someone in a forum over it.