Hassat Hunter

Same, but I am not that easily interested. AP, KOTOR2 or Freelancer had that odd honor for example. Usually demo's can convince me, but as they become scarcer... first day sales become scarcer. November, 10 euro. I tend to wait till acceptable prices and don't mind risking titles I am not sure of (ME, AA) if cheaper. Say, Overlord II for 15 euro's back when it was still 40 everywhere else, or ME2 during my summer vacation for 20 euro's. Though I usually buy like that, so I probably still buy the same amount of games as you do, I just get them 4 months behind your schedule . Think Pantaloons. That's not nearly as stupid as getting a glowing head helmet from game start.

I'd like, buy 1 full-price game A YEAR. 2 in a great year. (well, I guess unless you count full priced Telltale Games Seasons as a full-priced game too, even if it's about half the price) I am so not a hardcore gamer I guess. 2010 it went to Alpha Protocol. I pretty much always wait for the price drop. And with DLC, well, just have to wait till the collection, right? 2011 it probably will be The Witcher II.

DS has always been "you be the class of the weapon you pick". You want to be a mage, use spells, you'll be a mage. No silly character screen that locks you in place. Of course DS3 is wanting to be a bit different, so who knows what happens here...

If they go Anime-ish give me bikini-clad female PC's (high armor value *obviously*) and cat ear helmets and I won't complain...

The armor looks fine in the screen (not the art), but the helmet... god... the helmet. PS. I liked the Blood Dragon Armor look. In DA:O atleast, I never used it in ME2 (since I got DA:O UCE after ME2).

They better give me a cut if that's so... Ehm, I do? And according to the BMI Index I am too light.

Not very. But how common is it *at all* deleted content gets re-integrated? I am not sure how big this "technical issue" was, but yes. It does sound like there wasn't really much needed to be done to get Shale to working condition. Imagine this; There is a minor technical issue with NPC X. The game gets delayed 10 days, some more tweaking here and there. Fixed. Everyone happy and the NPC is in. There is a minor technical issue with NPC X. The game gets shipped regardless, crudely cut (think KOTOR2). Hardly good press for the dev if found out. There is a minor technical issue with NPC X. The game gets shipped regardless, and they fix this in the days between gold and release, which they refused to put back. Oh, and they ask cash for this too. That's Shale in DA:O. And sorry, it sounds like moneygrabbing to me. Maybe the "issue" was far more severe than this, but that's all we got IIRC, so that's kind of what we have to work with. Well, tell me what was all cut. Since yes, I think asking money for Deadeye on Manaan or the cut Carth-ending would be the pinacle of moneygrabbing. Can't really see the Dantooine Temple thingie done. Sleyheron as a whole though... that could work. Hardly cut content though if so much new stuff needs to be added then is it? But why work on it before GOLD is done. That's not how it worked with DA:O even was it? Then you were claiming Shale and Watcher etc. were made between the time Gold Edition was shipped and it hit retail. That's not even the case here? And then you wonder why some of us think it strange it's not developed for the maingame but *already* seperate DLC? Not quite content, stuff that works not entirely as intended, so has to be modified, but might not be limited to code (ie. Technical). There were quite the number of NPC in team detection fault issues in Orgins, and even more in Awakening for example. Or was it intended INF was raised or lowered for NPC's back in camp? I wonder if that's some kind of issue with how DA applies said boosts and penalties or just issues in the dialogues, like how these appear in the KOTOR's by someone making an error in the .dlg file. Hmmm... if the game is long, and has many variables (multiple choices for quests which have effects later being a primary one) wouldn't it be worse. Say, DA:O got QA for main till Gold, then it split on main and DLC. Result; Less bugs in Gold (yes, shockingly that's less), but less time for them to work on patch #1, since they need to be splitched between patch #1 and DLC. Now, with DA2 apparently Sebastian is made along. So that would mean split QA before Gold even, resulting in the likely possibility of more bugs in Gold, so Retail has more issues out of the box. Time for patch #1 depends on wheter Sebastian is done, and any eventual new DLC. Add in ME's, other possible projects and their DLC (or does DA QA is seperated from ME? I don't think so, but what do I know?) and you get like 10 projects at once to split people between instead of just 3 projects (ME3, DA2 and the possible third game). Clear enough now? Though I would assume the base code is free from issues, after a few patches, so you hardly need as much QA there as the main game, just focusing on the individual module's scripts, levelbuilding and choices etc. No fear of the weapon-gets-stuck-when-shooting-issue the main game had (just making this up, but I hardly doubt it never happened during ME's production) when the game's basis was still being worked on. Since I hardly doubt DLC touches that deep a level. Well, unless it suddenly includes zero-G or so when the main never did, but I haven't seen DLC's add such new stuff yet. Good point here though. But that's just more reason to properly test DLC's working rather than have full Day 0 DLC ready and working. Making an entire fully functional level does show that a leveleditor work properly, but you hardly need to do it just to make that assessement. Not sure why programming suddenly becomes more expensive after release though. Don't EA finance patches? Or is that just not enough to make up? Or is this some weird "pre-support" gets financed with purchases while "post-support" doesn't, while they are actually the same value and path the way for new titles and add-ons, and are supposed to be budget in already anyways? *confused* As in, the entire team, from levelbuilder, programmer, QA, the whole club, being 100% not involved in vanilla DA2. As you already confirmed that not the case, my point has only become stronger, that without this DLC more work could have done by said people to improve the base-game, but instead Bio is sleezing people away from it for the 'next project' already. I always find the people fools who don't take these offers and purchase 'small' or 'medium'. I mean 1,40 for 0.5 liter drink or 1,50 for 0.75 liter drink. You do the math. If you get twice the fries for 1.2x the money why not take the biggest offer (if you can eat it, which I can, so I don't need to buy a second burger etc.) DLC doesn't have the same price/quantity ratio as these supersize menu's have though. Same with the oddness that 0.5 liter cola in suppers is MORE expensive than 1.5 liter bottles. Crazy. Anyways... what were we talking about again?

I always take my time with games, DX was about 30 hours for me first time (and yes, that was Easy).

In the old days they would just give it in a patch though (as has happened with several games as a 'thank you for buying'. Since Shale is practically free, it's not that big a concern though. That's not exactly what I said. If I believed that I hardly would work on TSLRCM. But if something is cut, and then re-added, yeah, I would find it odd to actually charge for that, unless a VERY large chunck wasn't already inside of the game. From what I gather, this wasn't the case. Wheter or not it was isn't really the matter, just how it appears to an outsiders perspective, that is true though. Would I like the HK-Factory. Sure. Would I be happy if they charged $8,- for it, even though the majority was already done for shipping. Not likely. Then why offer them up at all. If they're on the disk, why not give them to all purchasers? Why have them on the disk, and have less than 10% actually use content that is installed for them? I mean, come on. Apparently there are even legal issues here, since they don't even appear with the UCE. Am I the only one who finds it bizarre that game-made content is locked out unless you get it from a specific dealer? Instead of actual content ingame, locked on the disk, wouldn't a nice manual, map or whatever intice people more to buy them from a shop instead of digital than 'deals' like these? Also, take a look what kind of discussion the day 0 DLC brought. And what's Bio's response? They make a DLC for... how many months left till DA2 is released? That is going waaay beyond even mere day 0 DLC. And even if a seperate team worked on them, the game is still being worked on, or is it gold already? I doubt it with the time remaining. Isn't THAT weird, DLC before a Gold version? Any changes made in the main would still need to be applied there too. QA needs to be split between the 2 projects, since I doubt it got it's own right now. All in all, it's doubtful this DLC was made 100% seperate. And you're suprised we are seeing it like a nickel and dime scheme? If not happening already. Which seems like a very likely possibility. I am not unsimpathetic to BW/EA's attempt to discourage second-hand sales though, that's not quite similar. However, offering 'new' DLC 2 months(?) in advance for pre-orders is something else entirely... True enough. I am not a contestant of selling content like the Witch Hunt or Lair of the Shadowbroker. However pre-order DLC bonusses (as Sebastian), brand pre-order DLC bonusses, selling off recycled maps (CoD), charging money for unlocking stuff on the disk... they all are the bane of DLC.

I know. Sadly enough. Which mades devs believe nickle and diming us is all good, since it may actually be for them. I know. It still sucks though that each and every game these day has it. EACH FPS. And each FPS/RPG even too (AP, ME2). Why can't they, you know, do both and I can skip 50% instead of making me hate 100%? *sad* It's like if each RPG goes like Twitch-button mashing DA2 seems to go and there are no more like DA:O or Drakensang. Wouldn't that be a bad "evolution"? Okay, bad example perhaps. How about building fraud. You pay 1.5x what you should, but you STILL get the tunnel/building/rails/whatever. People still get arrested for that though. Hell, Microsoft gets sued and fined for using it's position to nickle and dime players, forcing say Media Player upon us. Why keep it to MS? Then say so. I can't really go on something that's unwritten. Anyways... that doesn't explain all the DLC 'bonusses' one gets with pre-ordering from different sources. Which becomes creepingly wide-spread too. I doubt anyone can claim those aren't specifically cut out of the game for said purpose, can we now? Often they are even on the disks, just waiting activation. Nice example, except each topping is more like $4,- (not $1), so for $8,- (80% of the original price) you get 2 toppings, while you might aswell just get a second pizza for $20,- instead. Note to gaming websites/mags; Don't let triggerhappy FPS players review your RPG's... please. Also, ^.

You mean, like with the original The Witcher?

My filled DVD and games library says otherwise. I do actually buy stuff, I don't pirate like pretty much everyone else I know does... Although paying $8,- for, say, Horse Armor, or Darkspawn Chronicles, is a bit too much for me, yeah. I long for the days $30,- got you a nice expansion pack, not 4 pieces of crappy DLC which don't even get need 1/6th the gaming time/experience of a proper X-pack. I wish. And if they do, usually for the worse. Please shoot whoever thought up regenerating health in shooters... please! And yet I read in newspapers people get arrested for pyramid-schemes even if people willingly entered them. If investors get millions from their clients without giving anything back they go on trial. If Activision does so with a "map pack" it's all fine though apparently. Boggles the mind. *opens DA:O UCE* I do? Sure, I gotta wait a bit longer, but hey no problem. Not my loss, just Bio's loss. Same as Bethesda for me waiting for F:NV gold, skipping F3 entirely. I can hardly be the only one right? Otherwise why have Gold/Ultimate editions at all? Then maybe they should... I dunno... do something about that? Instead of spending even MORE money in GFX and try to recuperate it with asking $100 for their game? Several indie devs seem to do just fine financially this way. And big devs don't got nearly the amount of risk a starting indie dev has... Here in NL; 100 gulden in 2000. 45 euro in 2002. 50 euro in 2003. 60 euro in 2007. Which is still about the current price (although it's much more profitable now to ship it and pay in dollars as the euro has become stronger, so not exactly the same 60 euro as back then...).

Don't just re-install, but clear your drive of the entire folder that's left over after de-installation, it probably contains traces of half-installed/de-installed mods, which cause these issues.

Quote limit... True enough, but accepting game cutting for selling just "because there's enough left" is a really bad premises, which if we as gamers allow companies to do so quickly raise games above $100,- a piece for content that was already made for it as a whole. I am already doing such... *has DA:O UCE* And had planned such from the beginning after finding out how Bio handled DA:O DLC with that guy in camp, and other day 1 DLC's...

Yes, but those cut stuff is cut. Not sold seperately. I haven't seen cut BG/PS:T/IWD stuff for sale as DLC, have you? And then I say to them to stuff it. But since I am a loner in a market filled with people who are apparently happely chuncking $10,- for recycling (CoD) that means less game for me. Or everyone for that matter. Only that I care, and they apparently don't. And yeah, I got a problem with that... Then they get a hard time earning my money. Don't they want my money? I guess so... So it's okay to nickle and dime secondary quests? Got it. You generally make an expansion after the game is done. If it sells well. Not exactly next to the game itself. Then it might as well be in the game. When is DA2 released? And when is this Prince ready? And it doesn't strike you as odd as all that DLC is done, like, months before release? Not a bit? Like this, I wouldn't be surprised IF they could release a full X-pack at release... Exactly, even if wheter or not a separate team made this "DLC" is up for questioning at all... No storing in DA in order to stuff it into DLC? A vendor there in the main game to sell you stuff that isn't in the game? Or Fallout 3 not being playable after ending unless with a DLC packet. Not reaking like cuts for financial gain later anyone? Anyone? More full games? How sad it would be if we got that above DLC now... I'd prefer paying $60 for all content above $80 for all content, all cleverly disguised as small portions of overpriced "DLC"... DA2 hasn't even gone gold, so what excuse is there for this prince not to be able to be shipped with it? Why create DLC so soon instead of working on the actual game? Except there is no "game and DLC", just "game". And if you don't like it, there's plenty of ways these days to do research wheter you like what you're about to buy...

Still the point stands they willingly cut out a part of their game to sell it. And apparently now not only to 'new copy buyers' but to give as 'Collector's Edition bonus'... Well, I look the cat out of the tree for the UCE, just like I did with DA:O. And then buy it if like or not if it turned out the way it seems to go...

And they scrap modding instead of upping their quality *weeps*.

Hit the nail right here... Well, okay DS1 MP was fun, but a serious RPG like Baldur's Gate, KOTOR? No way. Why don't BioWare realise? Anyways, back to Dungeon Siege III...

Alpha Protocol over New Vegas for me. And I didn't really like Invisible War.

Even if I made him flee and never return? Also, seriously, the new char looks so much worse than the old.

Better than blowing up the nth Collector cluster... for me at least.

IMO DA:O > ME (2)... so making DA2 like ME would be a bad thing for me...

At least not *all* main story choices...

Not just Obsidian. Use of the ME2 Turret Skill (Engineer) frequently let me skip combat situations for cutscenes... Many a times in DA:O too.

But Wizards shouldn't have armor in the first place (robes, gloves, hats instead of armor and helmets). For Rogues, sure. But they either need to increase armor or get nimble instead. You know, difference in how you can make your chars. It just seems easier to adapt an already made system to work okay than utterly replace it with something that can be as easily broken by introducing horrible unbalanced numbers, yet is untested in actual practice. But that could be me... It worked rather fine in DA:O after all before they gave those insanely stat items per DLC.