Yeah well you do that, lol and Me and everyone else who doesn't get upset at the first sign of DLC will be enjoying our awesome game, but hey let us know how much fun sticking to misguided principles is, personally i dont think it can compare to blowing up some reapers but hey if you canceled your pre-order over something like day one DLC you obviously dont care as much about this game as the rest of us and thats ok, more copies for people who will actually enjoy itJaric93 said:
Why I am not going to buy Mass Effect 3
- Thread starter Jaric93
- Start date
I swear when the game comes out, and if this DLC turns out to not make a big difference at all (which I think it's safe to say it wont), I'm going to make a thread on it and throw a few of these whiny, self entitled posts in there as quotes, and we can all look back and laugh.
Sadly, this is true. Actual work started about 9 months ago, when it was just called 'The Prothean'.Loop Stricken said:
It's another sad mark of content cut to make DLC.
The reason I made this thread was not because I hate Bioware, EA, Origin, or anything like that I made it to point out to you that EA is once again ripping us off and that I don't intend to just let them again. I feel that if this kind of thing continues we will end up with a Mass Effect 4 where you are Commander Shepard being followed by a bunch of Husks because Garrus, Wrex, and all the other characters that have any kind of personality or originality or us-fullness or are actually related to a plot are £20 a day and you've already forked over your life savings to buy the game.
This is a ridiculous example but my point is how far is too far. Personally I think a Prothean in any state is a game changing character and to sell the game to you then take away such an important part.
Put another way, you've ordered a £30 pizza (it's a really good pizza) but when it arrives there's a slice missing and when you ask why the slice is missing, and your told that that is another £10 for that slice or you could pay £55 and you'd get the slice and a bottle of Pepsi. What would you really do?
This is a ridiculous example but my point is how far is too far. Personally I think a Prothean in any state is a game changing character and to sell the game to you then take away such an important part.
Put another way, you've ordered a £30 pizza (it's a really good pizza) but when it arrives there's a slice missing and when you ask why the slice is missing, and your told that that is another £10 for that slice or you could pay £55 and you'd get the slice and a bottle of Pepsi. What would you really do?
I've been hearing ME3 getting some stick for reasons that I've tried to avoid seeing because I'm trying to avoid ANYTHING that could spoil the game for me in ANY WAY.
If it's a gameplay design that people don't like, remember that people didn't like the thermal clip system from ME2, but those outcries died down after a while. It took me a while to get used to the new cover system that was actually NECESSARY to combat, unlike the first game.
As for the DLC thing, call me a sheep with loose pockets, but I'm not really complaining.
If it's a gameplay design that people don't like, remember that people didn't like the thermal clip system from ME2, but those outcries died down after a while. It took me a while to get used to the new cover system that was actually NECESSARY to combat, unlike the first game.
As for the DLC thing, call me a sheep with loose pockets, but I'm not really complaining.
I'm still going to buy it but I probably wont use that DLC, because I think it sounds retarded. I don't think it's important, I think it's a bad writing choice to bring this character into the game.
-EDIT-
Actually, a question I just thought of for people up in arms about this.
In DA:O and ME2 the extra characters basically added nothing to the events of the world, other than being there, having some story and having their own quest. They didn't have much of an impact on the outcome of the game. Shale was done very well and Zaeed was forgettable.
In ME3, this character will have the chance to affect the outcome of the story. So my question.
If this DLC was released in say, six months times, would it be ok?
-EDIT-
Actually, a question I just thought of for people up in arms about this.
In DA:O and ME2 the extra characters basically added nothing to the events of the world, other than being there, having some story and having their own quest. They didn't have much of an impact on the outcome of the game. Shale was done very well and Zaeed was forgettable.
In ME3, this character will have the chance to affect the outcome of the story. So my question.
If this DLC was released in say, six months times, would it be ok?
No it really wasn'tLoop Stricken said:
The Prothean NPC that tells you shit about the game was being worked on months before that, the Idea, development, and implantation of a DLC that makes him a squadmate was not.
the great thing is he is still in the game, and still gives you all the information he knows even if you dont have the DLC, he is just not recruitable without the DLC however.Jaric93 said:
Here is a nice quote made by Jessica Merizan, Community Manager for Bioware, on a reddit subforum where she did a ask me anything interview today.
http://www.reddit.com/r/masseffect/comments/q2sl2/i_am_jessica_merizan_community_manager_for/
"[?]jessicamerizan 191 points 4 hours ago
I think there's a lot of misinformation out there and I wish the guy who made the initial video about it would have had an open mind before jumping to conclusions based on a leak we weren't ready to address. Since I'm a BioWare employee, I know people won't automatically trust me, but I hope people will consider that it wasn't cut content from the larger game. I was in Edmonton when we were finishing the game in November/December and I was in Edmonton again last month when they were working on the Day 1 DLC. It definitely was only possible to do because the main game was in certification (which means we had to wait for people to test it and make sure everything was good etc before we could get the greenlight to sell it). I also played the game WITHOUT the DLC in my first playthrough and honestly, it's an awesome addition but I was more than happy with what I was given in the game. It's bigger and more expansive than ever. Of course, I understand the concern but I hope we can all have an intelligent conversation about it and cover what the facts are in this situation.
Hope that helps a little bit. This is an awkward format to answer this question, but I know I could explain it if you were sitting next to me on a couch with some coffee/tea
also this farther down
[?]ZombieWomble 19 points 4 hours ago
The production is one issue, but I think many more people are annoyed by the particular content of the DLC - I expect that if it was a "normal" character, like Zaeed, Shale, Sebastian or Kasumi in Bioware's other titles, it would probably have been met with a shrug and some minor moaning about greedy developers.
But the choice of character is so shocking, given the rest of the ME lore, that it's mind-boggling that it was bundled into DLC. At first glance, the character sounds like they must be plot- and lore-significant, simply because they exist, and the fact that it apparently sits outside the main plotline is baffling. Which raises the question of when the idea of this character was introduced, and if it was taken from the original plans for the main game, or not. The timing of when the team worked on it is really immaterial to its impact on the world and its lore.
So, to sum all that up in a question: There is a lot of anger about the lore surrounding this character. Is it as bad as it looks? Does this character's existence really shake the lore as much as it seems they must, or is it closer in heft to Zaeed or Kasumi?
It's sad, really, because I'm now torn - ME3 really should be a day 1 purchase, given the pedigree, but if this really is significant, plot-shaking content carved off into DLC, then that's not really something that I can get behind.
permalink
parent
[?]jessicamerizan 19 points 1 hour ago
I hope you understand that I'm in a position where to reassure you, it would require me to reveal story spoilers, something that I don't think is acceptable.
Personally, I began my career as an archaeologist (for serious!) and the events surrounding this new character speak to me. However, if it wasn't DLC, it definitely wouldn't have been in the main game. There's other things that didn't fit in the main game that may end up as future DLC.
Again, I think this is a cool edition and definitely intended as a reward for serious fans (many of whom have purchased the collector's edition so this isn't even an issue for them). However, I have played the game without it and the lore surrounding the DLC is in the game already, this character just gives their own take on it.
Was that any less vague or helpful to anyone?
http://www.reddit.com/r/masseffect/comments/q2sl2/i_am_jessica_merizan_community_manager_for/
"[?]jessicamerizan
I think there's a lot of misinformation out there and I wish the guy who made the initial video about it would have had an open mind before jumping to conclusions based on a leak we weren't ready to address. Since I'm a BioWare employee, I know people won't automatically trust me, but I hope people will consider that it wasn't cut content from the larger game. I was in Edmonton when we were finishing the game in November/December and I was in Edmonton again last month when they were working on the Day 1 DLC. It definitely was only possible to do because the main game was in certification (which means we had to wait for people to test it and make sure everything was good etc before we could get the greenlight to sell it). I also played the game WITHOUT the DLC in my first playthrough and honestly, it's an awesome addition but I was more than happy with what I was given in the game. It's bigger and more expansive than ever. Of course, I understand the concern but I hope we can all have an intelligent conversation about it and cover what the facts are in this situation.
Hope that helps a little bit. This is an awkward format to answer this question, but I know I could explain it if you were sitting next to me on a couch with some coffee/tea
also this farther down
[?]ZombieWomble 19 points 4 hours ago
The production is one issue, but I think many more people are annoyed by the particular content of the DLC - I expect that if it was a "normal" character, like Zaeed, Shale, Sebastian or Kasumi in Bioware's other titles, it would probably have been met with a shrug and some minor moaning about greedy developers.
But the choice of character is so shocking, given the rest of the ME lore, that it's mind-boggling that it was bundled into DLC. At first glance, the character sounds like they must be plot- and lore-significant, simply because they exist, and the fact that it apparently sits outside the main plotline is baffling. Which raises the question of when the idea of this character was introduced, and if it was taken from the original plans for the main game, or not. The timing of when the team worked on it is really immaterial to its impact on the world and its lore.
So, to sum all that up in a question: There is a lot of anger about the lore surrounding this character. Is it as bad as it looks? Does this character's existence really shake the lore as much as it seems they must, or is it closer in heft to Zaeed or Kasumi?
It's sad, really, because I'm now torn - ME3 really should be a day 1 purchase, given the pedigree, but if this really is significant, plot-shaking content carved off into DLC, then that's not really something that I can get behind.
permalink
parent
[?]jessicamerizan
I hope you understand that I'm in a position where to reassure you, it would require me to reveal story spoilers, something that I don't think is acceptable.
Personally, I began my career as an archaeologist (for serious!) and the events surrounding this new character speak to me. However, if it wasn't DLC, it definitely wouldn't have been in the main game. There's other things that didn't fit in the main game that may end up as future DLC.
Again, I think this is a cool edition and definitely intended as a reward for serious fans (many of whom have purchased the collector's edition so this isn't even an issue for them). However, I have played the game without it and the lore surrounding the DLC is in the game already, this character just gives their own take on it.
Was that any less vague or helpful to anyone?
Important squad member? Please the dudes all got turned it things by the things and no longer do things. The Reapers are where it's at and one squaddie aint going to matter shite.Jaric93 said:
Unless you can unite a million gamers to not buy ME3 and then show EA proof after release they did not buy it, how would EA know you didn't to take it as a sign anyway? How low would sales have to be for them to abandon this admittedly shitty model of business? In short I'll just play it anyhoo.
A-fucking men.AyreonMaiden said:
I was watching the youtube video, and the amount of people in the comments encouraging others to pirate were really troubling. If anything, Pirating adds massive fuel to the fire. The next move EA will make will be to put terrible, oppressive DRM in all their products, in response to the massive piracy.
What boycotting the product does is say: EA, you're doing something so wrong that I'm disadvantaging myself to point it out to you. You made such a big fuck up that I've decided that it's worth it to deprive myself to the finale of one of my favourite video game stories ever to make sure you don't do it again. That's balls, right there; "I will not buy this piece of god's own golden teat, because you dun goofed with your business practices."
What does pirating do? "The market's out there, we just need to somehow get to it. We need to make it so inconvenient to pirate games, that they have to buy from us. Because they know that if someone's pirating a game under the guise of protest, making a statement while continuing to consume the product, EA knows that if they apply enough pressure and inconvenience them enough, they'll be able to get money out of them. They know that they're far weaker than the former.
The full boycotters are telling EA that they really want the game, but they're going to give up a GotY contender to protest. EA can't get those customers by enticing them. They're already not buying the game at all, there's not really any addons, any extra missions, DRM, or aesthetic elements that could entice them to consume the game legit. The only thing that EA can count on is submitting to their demands; not putting in Day 1 DLC (or having stupid over the top marketing campaigns or milking franchises, for that matter.) They know that if they do that, you'll buy the game. If you're strong enough to miss out on one of the most anticipated games for the past decade at least, you won't give in to glittery addons.
Not to mention that piracy just lets EA bulk up their piracy figures, and legitimizes the use of DRM. It's justified; if people are cheating them out of their money, EA's well within their rights to protect that. But they can't protect against people not consuming their product at all.
The same with buying used, not to mention that buying used games adds a sizeable demand to the overall used games market. Buy a copy of Mass Effect used, you prevent another person from buying that used copy. And he may not be as set on not buying the game new as you are. So you may have just indirectly caused a person who would have otherwise have bought used to hand over $40 or whatever to EA, basically making your point worthless (isn't economics fun?)
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
You mean he's one of those pods hidden away in the first one that presumably are on Eden prime as well given the beacon was found there? You know, the race that's solution to the Reaper problem was to hide away?
If this were 1 or 2 where you were still trying to get people to believe you about the Reapers, maybe this might be an issue. But allow me to point out that the point of this game is to band together the races of the universe in hopes of beating the Reapers, and a single Prothean, the last of his kind isn't going to have the same weight here.
Hell, the info from the last game about the Reapers that Joker and Cerberus have gotten a hold of will probably be more help given how they were taken from Protheans who worked close with the construction of the Reapers rather than one who we don't even know if he's a soldier, a scientist, or a goddamn civilian who got lucky.
Yes, a Prothean is a big deal, but plot-wise, he's actually not likely to be as important as you think at this point, much like how the former head of the Blue Suns wasn't that big a deal in the game where you were fighting that group too often, or how a dwarf turned golem by the MacGruffin of Dwarf storyline wasn't necessary either.
If you're going to start complaining about necessary DLC in Bioware's games, look at Awakening, Witch Hunt, Arrival, or even Lair of the Shadow Broker, all of which fill in large gaps in plot more so than the last survivor of a race might when you're working to try to survive an extinction event on a galactic scale.
If this were 1 or 2 where you were still trying to get people to believe you about the Reapers, maybe this might be an issue. But allow me to point out that the point of this game is to band together the races of the universe in hopes of beating the Reapers, and a single Prothean, the last of his kind isn't going to have the same weight here.
Hell, the info from the last game about the Reapers that Joker and Cerberus have gotten a hold of will probably be more help given how they were taken from Protheans who worked close with the construction of the Reapers rather than one who we don't even know if he's a soldier, a scientist, or a goddamn civilian who got lucky.
Yes, a Prothean is a big deal, but plot-wise, he's actually not likely to be as important as you think at this point, much like how the former head of the Blue Suns wasn't that big a deal in the game where you were fighting that group too often, or how a dwarf turned golem by the MacGruffin of Dwarf storyline wasn't necessary either.
If you're going to start complaining about necessary DLC in Bioware's games, look at Awakening, Witch Hunt, Arrival, or even Lair of the Shadow Broker, all of which fill in large gaps in plot more so than the last survivor of a race might when you're working to try to survive an extinction event on a galactic scale.
Yes, this is maddening that it isn't free to all, but we don't even know if this is cut content or content that was only focused on after the main game was complete and they had time to work on DLC before launch (look at the story on that on the Escapist). Yes he's in the artbook apparently, but there was a lot in the art book of ME1 that never made it in. Hell, they probably wanted him in given this was the main game, kept it as a pet project in case they had extra time and then turned out to be able to make it.
TL;DR: You're assuming a lot of things here about the DLC based on just what it's about. There are worse things you could rage about, especially when it comes to Activision (a company that rips up the developers for extra profits), Ubisoft (which still thinks DRM is good), Capcom (who made a career of not selling whole games), GAME (which is dropping one of the games Operation Rainfall fought for), Austrailia (which continues to have problems with R18), ACTA (which is still an issue), etc. but you're busy trying to convince people that DLC is a reason to cancel a preorder of a game, where if you preordered you really should have had enough faith that you'd like the game enough to pay $60US.
It isn't cut content.Delock said:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.351719-Why-I-am-not-going-to-buy-Mass-Effect-3?page=10#comment_form
[?]jessicamerizan
I think there's a lot of misinformation out there and I wish the guy who made the initial video about it would have had an open mind before jumping to conclusions based on a leak we weren't ready to address. Since I'm a BioWare employee, I know people won't automatically trust me, but I hope people will consider that it wasn't cut content from the larger game. I was in Edmonton when we were finishing the game in November/December and I was in Edmonton again last month when they were working on the Day 1 DLC. It definitely was only possible to do because the main game was in certification (which means we had to wait for people to test it and make sure everything was good etc before we could get the greenlight to sell it). I also played the game WITHOUT the DLC in my first playthrough and honestly, it's an awesome addition but I was more than happy with what I was given in the game. It's bigger and more expansive than ever. Of course, I understand the concern but I hope we can all have an intelligent conversation about it and cover what the facts are in this situation.
Hope that helps a little bit. This is an awkward format to answer this question, but I know I could explain it if you were sitting next to me on a couch with some coffee/tea
SajuukKhar said:It isn't cut content.Delock said:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.351719-Why-I-am-not-going-to-buy-Mass-Effect-3?page=10#comment_form
[?]jessicamerizan201 points 5 hours ago
I think there's a lot of misinformation out there and I wish the guy who made the initial video about it would have had an open mind before jumping to conclusions based on a leak we weren't ready to address. Since I'm a BioWare employee, I know people won't automatically trust me, but I hope people will consider that it wasn't cut content from the larger game. I was in Edmonton when we were finishing the game in November/December and I was in Edmonton again last month when they were working on the Day 1 DLC. It definitely was only possible to do because the main game was in certification (which means we had to wait for people to test it and make sure everything was good etc before we could get the greenlight to sell it). I also played the game WITHOUT the DLC in my first playthrough and honestly, it's an awesome addition but I was more than happy with what I was given in the game. It's bigger and more expansive than ever. Of course, I understand the concern but I hope we can all have an intelligent conversation about it and cover what the facts are in this situation.
Hope that helps a little bit. This is an awkward format to answer this question, but I know I could explain it if you were sitting next to me on a couch with some coffee/tea
I was actually in support of the idea that it wasn't cut. Like I said, it seems like this one idea that got tossed around the concept phase a lot, but couldn't be fit in when time came for main development, but was one of the first things you guys would work on when "down time" came. I understand even modifying when something happens in a game like this (like what happened with Legion, Tali, etc. in the second) takes a lot of work, so I can't begin to believe that if this were a core part of the game it would be so easy to cut and sell as DLC.
Anyways, looking forward to the game. Glad you guys gave the option for me to get this since Collectors editions were sold out and I'm still a bit hurt I never was able to get the DLC from the collectors edition of 2 on my 360. I'd take you up on the coffee thing if it were that easy. Hell, I'd like to be able to treat the entire Bioware staff. You guys have given some great stuff and I don't think you deserve this rapid turn around in fan response.
Looking forward to the game along with the rest of my apartment-mates.
