Platinumoxicity on 24/1/2014 at 15:27
Quote Posted by NuEffect
Ah gardabd grah haratah. Burga barbar barerabar atakaka, garabar waka bok nika tik tok harhgaragaha? Barga. :confused:
Bargagto toatagore erio foghalth ehnegklek? :rolleyes:
arga ha ga haga haga haga ha :laff:
Good effort, but your argument fails to account for derr and gabloo, so unfortunately it fails to prove or disprove anything.
june gloom on 24/1/2014 at 17:55
Haha, sometimes Subjeff pulls out a winner. Only other thing it needed was the classic BARPO BARPO BARP BARP BARPO.
GodzillaX8 on 25/1/2014 at 03:38
Quote Posted by Shinrazero
I think you are downplaying legitimate concerns when it comes to DLC. No, not all DLC is bad but come on. Anyone remember the(
http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/721625/mass-effect-3-day-one-dlc-controversy-prompts-ea-statement/) Mass Effect 3 DLC fiasco, where they stated over and over that the DLC was developed separately and concurrently with the main game? Changing one freaking line of code unlocked the contents. Simply infuriating and insulting. Look at Reaper of Souls, the D3 expansion. Diamonds and the mystic were cut from the main game and saved for the expansion. What about horse armor for Oblivion, downloadable LIVES for Sonic Lost World, the Sims, Train Simulator, the list goes on. Don't even get me started on Capcom and their on-disc shenanigans. The point I'm trying to make is that good DLC is far and few between and DLC operates exactly the way you say it isn't.
You do realize that even if it was on the disc, it was very likely developed separately with the intent to sell as an add-on and thereby also increased the budget of the game accordingly?
It's not like they push out a 100% complete release, and then retroactively go back and clip stuff out to sell. That's not how it works. DLC is developed as an add-on product from the beginning.
PS: Most of the content from all of Blizzard's expansions consisted of stuff they had intended to implement into the original game, but had to cut to stay on budget and/or hit release windows.
SubJeff on 25/1/2014 at 09:34
Quote Posted by GodzillaX8
It's not like they push out a 100% complete release, and then retroactively go back and clip stuff out to sell. That's not how it works. DLC is developed as an add-on product from the beginning.
There is no way of you knowing this.
Starker on 25/1/2014 at 10:51
Quote Posted by GodzillaX8
It's not like they push out a 100% complete release, and then retroactively go back and clip stuff out to sell. That's not how it works. DLC is developed as an add-on product from the beginning.
Nobody is claiming that. The complaint is that things relevant to the main game or even main plot are being sold separately as DLC at launch. How would you feel if Baldur's Gate came out today with a Minsc DLC?
june gloom on 25/1/2014 at 11:40
I personally would rather they sold a DLC that made Baldur's Gate fun.
GodzillaX8 on 25/1/2014 at 15:56
Quote Posted by NuEffect
There is no way of you knowing this.
Except for, you know, having friends who are actually in the industry. Other than that, there's no way.
Quote Posted by Starker
Nobody is claiming that. The complaint is that things relevant to the main game or even main plot are being sold separately as DLC at launch. How would you feel if Baldur's Gate came out today with a Minsc DLC?
So you're saying that there is absolutely no way that any additional characters/party members could be reasonably justified to be separately developed as an add-on pack without being some kind of heinous greed-monger? If they happen to finish those characters before the main game is officially out, they are REQUIRED to release them for free, regardless of how the development was budgeted? That's a bit entitled.
TheDorkProject on 25/1/2014 at 16:41
I preordered it back in October on Steam (the Master Thief Edition) for the following reasons:
1.) Whatever its flaws, I want to encourage the game-making world in general to keep this series alive. Even if Thief 4 is miserable, Thief 5 ten years from now with a different development team might be great, and is a lot more likely to happen if Thief 4 is profitable.
2.) 10% off, even the Master Thief Edition was like $47, which is pretty good compared to the $60 the console versions will cost.
3.) There wasn't a physical PC edition I could find anyway, so that eliminated a hesitation I would normally have had about the Steam version. Thief is one series I would definitely prefer a physical copy of. I wish there was not only a physical PC edition, but a collector's PC edition with a Garrett statue or something. Even if he didn't look like the cover of Thief 1/2 which would be cooler.
4.) I wanted the Bank Heist, I don't want to miss out on anything. Even if the game isn't fantastic.
Ultimately I expect I will eventually pick up a copy for PS4, when it's cheap. Or maybe XBone or who knows what... I imagine it will be a next gen console, I don't own either yet but I think my purchasing of a PS4 is more certain and sooner than an XBone. This I will do purely for the sake of owning a physical copy of the game even if it's not on my preferred platform. But I will try to resist picking one up until the game is like $9.99 or something, which will be a couple years off at least.
I have plenty of gripes with this game, most of all the Stephen Russell thing, but it does seem like they are somewhat receptive to our feelings, having added a lot of customization to the UI and such, and I don't think the game looks THAT bad in the videos. I may not like some things about how the character moves, and how aggressively he swats at loot, and such, but at the moment I don't really think it looks any worse than Thief 3, which was a pretty annoying game in a lot of ways, in a lot of the same ways in fact... UI, cumbersome player movement, etc. Granted, Thief 3 still had Russell - but Thief 4 does not look like some sort of absolute trainwreck to me. It just looks like a flawed game which will require some tolerance to get enjoyment out of.
GodzillaX8 on 25/1/2014 at 20:09
If Mass Effect 3 were released in 1997, the extra character/mission would not have been in the game. The budget for the game would have been smaller and they would have been forced to cut content. Further, the core development/production of the main game wraps up MONTHS before the game actually launches. The last few months are heavily focused on QA, polish, and last minute fixes. The production staff (designers, writers, etc) usually begins working on a new project at this time, or helping with the QA process if absolutely necessary, so it's not entirely out of the question that they would produce a piece of content as small as a single character, costume, or mission before the release of the game. Not only that, but usually several weeks before a game launches, it goes gold, which means manufacturing has begun based on the final release candidate. There is plenty of time before release for the development staff to move on to other bits of content. You very clearly don't know how the game industry works.
According to your incredibly misguided beliefs, Diablo 2 should have launched with everything that was in Lord of Destruction, for free, because they originally had the idea for the content while making the original game, and even started production on it before the game launched.
So what if Dead Space 3 had a lot of DLC? Almost all of it was optional and pointless crap. The only DLC for DS3 I would even consider buying is Awakened. They can add all the micro-transactions they want to a game to make it easy mode for people who want to throw money at it, it doesn't affect me in the slightest. I'll still be basing my purchasing decision on whether or not the game is worth it, and whether or not each piece of content is worth it. Screaming that it's inherently evil just for existing is the most incredibly ridiculous thing ever.
Games in the past almost never had a dozen different character costumes/designs/skins you could switch between, so I don't think letting dumb people spend extra money on pointless customization is "ruining video games raaaaaaaah!"
Fun fact: League of Legends (you know, one of the biggest multiplayer games in the world) sustains itself solely by allowing impatient/stupid people to spend money on early unlocks and useless skins.
