Even your analogy is incorrect. The DLC squadmate was already in the distribution disc. A lot of people have proven this by editing config files.
So the more appropriate analogy would be: paying to unlock extra space that's definitely already in the dishwasher, and that you can probably unlock yourself if you knew what you were doing.
1)ME3 was finished as a whole months before it actually came out.
2)Javik required certain framework elements and models to be on the disk to integrate into the game properly.
3)Placing that framework on the disk was simple. But placing Javik (who frankly was very unnecessary anyway) onto the game would have required months of extra work.
They did something similar with Kasumi and Zaeed in ME2. Stop whining about it.
I love how you removed the part where I explicitly stated that I bought the DLC anyway. Out-of-context quotes really make my day.
That said:
1) True, but that's not the point. The point was that the DLC ? or parts of it ? were completed as well.
2) BS. Are there flags on ME2 allowing you to use Liara prior to downloading Lair of the Shadow Broker?
3) See 2.
4) I'm well aware that the actual DLC contains the mission, as well as the narrative and additional dialogue for Javik. Again, I bought the fricking DLC, and I would again if I had to.
It matters because you're removing the context of my post, which was:
a) The original dishwasher analogy was incorrect
b) whether parts of the DLC were included in the game disc doesn't matter, since the narrative and extended gameplay portions are in the actual DLC which makes the whole thing worthy of an actual purchase.
I love your doublespeak by the way. You should think about working for EA's PR department. Not that I'm accusing you of being an EA shill, nor do I plan to.
HalfTangible said:
1) Parts that were needed for the DLC to work properly, yes. Is that a problem?
See 2. BioWare can add new squadmates via DLC, without having any "prior framework" installed in the game disc. It's probably even far easier in ME3, where they the total squadmate list isn't fixed, and you really don't see who you're missing.
HalfTangible said:
2) Liara wasn't a permanent squadmate. She didn't need to because she would never be selected from an interface, and her art resources were already in the game.
If you notice, prior to the actual Shadow Broker missions, her model a generic Asari formal wear, not the white jacket-and-tights she's now known for. So no, aside from her head, all her other art resources are imported to the game via the DLC.
HalfTangible said:
3) If you recall official statements on the matter, the game as a whole was actually done months before release, and in fact pretty much NEEDED months before it was ready to be shipped out. They also needed several months to finish making the DLC. The DLC was done before launch day because they did the final steps of the disk process (don't ask me what, i don't know and the dog is giving himself a BJ is making it hard to remember what it was called *gag*) in tandem with their work on the DLC. IE, they spent the last months before launch day finishing the downloaded part of the DLC.
again, you seem to be missing the point, which is that whether or not the game was finished months before printing, a portion of the DLC was already completed by then, and the full DLC was available on launch. It doesn't matter how long ago the main content of the game was completed. The fact remains that:
a) DLC mission was available on launch day
b) DLC squadmate was available as early as mass-production of game discs. On different formats.
HalfTangible said:
4) So? You were complaining about it using information that was false.
I wasn't complaining about the DLC, I was pointing out the inherent flaw in comparing it to a dishwasher. Do they even have analogies where you're from?
If I complained about anything, it's the useless bonus items included in the Digital Deluxe edition.
Next time, read a post in full instead of half-assedly attempting to dismantle it.
Title says it all, why do people complain about gamers being so entitled?
If I buy a dishwasher, and it doesn't wash dishes correctly, or I have to buy $10 add on so that I can wash forks with it, and I said "NO THESE THINGS SHOULD BE STANDARD!", would that make me entitled? I don't think so, so why is it the case with games?
Why are gamers specifically targeted as being entitled?
Because you are reducing this entire medium and every single artistic value that it has to mere dust. You are doing more harm to this medium than any shitty publisher ever could by devaluing any artistic achievement that has ever been made.
Some triple-A studio releasing a shitty and predictable shooter won't devalue the significance and achievements of the medium. But, reducing EVERYTHING that it has done to mere toy-making will.
I hope to the high heavens that video-games won't end up artistically devoid and its potential ruined because of pissy fans.
Can we please stop with the artistic arguments? I mean seriously. The ending was a ripoff of Matrix: Reloaded, except Keanu actually took a Renegade option.
When that crappy movie came out with that retarded Architect plot twist, nobody rushed to defend its artistic merit, so I don't see why people are scrambling to do so with this whole Starchild debacle.
I prefer the guys who are saying "the ending sucks, we know! Shut up already!" At least those guys know that we got served a heaping pile of dung at the end; they just moved on a lot quicker than the rest of us did.
Even your analogy is incorrect. The DLC squadmate was already in the distribution disc. A lot of people have proven this by editing config files.
So the more appropriate analogy would be: paying to unlock extra space that's definitely already in the dishwasher, and that you can probably unlock yourself if you knew what you were doing.
1)ME3 was finished as a whole months before it actually came out.
2)Javik required certain framework elements and models to be on the disk to integrate into the game properly.
3)Placing that framework on the disk was simple. But placing Javik (who frankly was very unnecessary anyway) onto the game would have required months of extra work.
They did something similar with Kasumi and Zaeed in ME2. Stop whining about it.
I love how you removed the part where I explicitly stated that I bought the DLC anyway. Out-of-context quotes really make my day.
That said:
1) True, but that's not the point. The point was that the DLC ? or parts of it ? were completed as well.
2) BS. Are there flags on ME2 allowing you to use Liara prior to downloading Lair of the Shadow Broker?
3) See 2.
4) I'm well aware that the actual DLC contains the mission, as well as the narrative and additional dialogue for Javik. Again, I bought the fricking DLC, and I would again if I had to.
It matters because you're removing the context of my post, which was:
a) The original dishwasher analogy was incorrect
b) whether parts of the DLC were included in the game disc doesn't matter, since the narrative and extended gameplay portions are in the actual DLC which makes the whole thing worthy of an actual purchase.
I love your doublespeak by the way. You should think about working for EA's PR department. Not that I'm accusing you of being an EA shill, nor do I plan to.
HalfTangible said:
1) Parts that were needed for the DLC to work properly, yes. Is that a problem?
See 2. BioWare can add new squadmates via DLC, without having any "prior framework" installed in the game disc. It's probably even far easier in ME3, where they the total squadmate list isn't fixed, and you really don't see who you're missing.
HalfTangible said:
2) Liara wasn't a permanent squadmate. She didn't need to because she would never be selected from an interface, and her art resources were already in the game.
If you notice, prior to the actual Shadow Broker missions, her model a generic Asari formal wear, not the white jacket-and-tights she's now known for. So no, aside from her head, all her other art resources are imported to the game via the DLC.
HalfTangible said:
3) If you recall official statements on the matter, the game as a whole was actually done months before release, and in fact pretty much NEEDED months before it was ready to be shipped out. They also needed several months to finish making the DLC. The DLC was done before launch day because they did the final steps of the disk process (don't ask me what, i don't know and the dog is giving himself a BJ is making it hard to remember what it was called *gag*) in tandem with their work on the DLC. IE, they spent the last months before launch day finishing the downloaded part of the DLC.
again, you seem to be missing the point, which is that whether or not the game was finished months before printing, a portion of the DLC was already completed by then, and the full DLC was available on launch. It doesn't matter how long ago the main content of the game was completed. The fact remains that:
a) DLC mission was available on launch day
b) DLC squadmate was available as early as mass-production of game discs. On different formats.
HalfTangible said:
4) So? You were complaining about it using information that was false.
I wasn't complaining about the DLC, I was pointing out the inherent flaw in comparing it to a dishwasher. Do they even have analogies where you're from?
If I complained about anything, it's the useless bonus items included in the Digital Deluxe edition.
Next time, read a post in full instead of half-assedly attempting to dismantle it.
The fact you bought the DLC doesn't change that you're complaining about it. Sure, you didn't say 'gawd this is awful Bioware is full of cocksuckers trololololol' but your analogy completely misses why the DLC was available on day 1 but was not on the disc. In fact, your entire argument betrays an ignorance of this point: you claim that since part of it was on there, the rest should have been too. I am saying the rest was not done and THAT was what was worked on in the months after the game's completion before launch day.
Yesterday, but I actually quoted it two days ago and thought i posted. Found out I didn't later. Then again, like I said, the section you're saying i deleted has nothing to do with this, so...
A) Not sure why that matters when YOUR analogy is wrong, too.
B) So your dishwasher analogy IS flawed because what you were buying wasn't on the disk.
Nah, EA'd never hire me. I actually mean it when i say I did not plan to accuse you of being a hypocrite, and actually DO want to defuse the situation instead of drag it out for months while i rake in free publicity. If i wanted to insult you I'd do it to your face. Avatar. Whatever.
Like I said. THEY DID THE SAME THING WITH KASUMI AND ZAEED.
Just because Liara was wearing a different outfit doesn't mean the outfit she wears in LotSB wasn't in the game. She switches back to her Asari outfit when she comes on the Normandy, recall.
It matters, because the DLC content in question that we downloaded was not part of the disk, which tears your analogy to shreds.
Yes. And where i come from, coming up with a new analogy implies you believe the new analogy as opposed to the old one. Since the old one meant that the DLC was okay, i assumed that yours meant 'no it wasn't'.
Perhaps I'm reading more into your comments than you are. Your dishwasher analogy (fucked up as it is) implies that they should've handed it to you because it was already there. When it WASN'T already there. That's the point.
Nothing else you post is saying really matters. If being told you're wrong makes you angry I suggest you leave this discussion after your next post (or preferably before) so this doesn't devolve into a flame war.
Because some fans take criticism of their game as a personal attack. I couldn't tell you why this is the case, but...yeah.
And what's more: that specific sort of fan seems to respond in an especially negative manner to constructive criticism. It comes off almost as "if you like something, you're not allowed to admit that it's less than perfect."
Imagine if EA/BioWare made Baldur's Gate 2 today...$10 for being able to use Viconia and have her character-specific events happen, $10 for the Sahuagin City (that can easily be skipped and isn't exactly plot relevant so it can be taken out, right?), $10 for Lilarcor, $10 for a side quest pack in Athkatla (you don't need them all to raise enough gold to continue anyway, right?)...
...that's basically the problem. We used to get a full game that was a lot bigger and offered a lot more playtime. Now, some studios seem to be hell bent on stripping it down to the skeleton, offer that skeleton as the "game", while everything that fleshes it out is just a "bonus" that they don't "owe" to us, and anyone who still thinks some meat should come on those bones if only so we don't break our teeth when we bite in is "entitled".
Ah, Baldur's Gate 2. One of the games that I whet my RPG game love on. <3 Now I have to track it down and play it again...
But on to the subject. You are correct in thinking this way. A lot of gamers, especially those who recall such gems as BG1&2, Diablo 1&2, and the original Doom games, feel we are being cheated when we have to but all the additional content for a game. We hate that companies can squeeze more money out of us by releasing only a skeleton of a game. Like you said earlier... Yes, you can rescue Viconia, but you can't have her in the party and have her storyline unless you shell out extra cash. Well, there are some who are going "Peh, what do I care" but then some people (like myself) were interested in her from the get-go, because she was immediately identified as a Drow, and wanted to know what the hell she was doing on the surface.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
