RANDOM VIDEO GAME NEWS

[Zoraptor]

Meh, as always GabeN only believes in competition that benefits him, if it's him tipping the playing field to his goals it's fine, if it's someone else it's horribly unfair and monopolistic. Him bundling his system on unrelated products on windows = good competition, totally not unfair; his company making his own OS is totally not unfair; MS doing it (sheesh, if you went by NostraGabeus the sky would have fallen with win8's release, instead MS have been using steamworks for their PC games. Couldn't pick his nose, that guy) is just inherently unfair!

 

 

 

Dragon Derp did it too. 

 

 

How so?  Dragon Age released a full expansion.  None of the DLC really impacted the story of the main games.

 

I suppose there's an argument for Witch Hunt. Not a very good one, since it didn't lead into anything in DA2. Presumably it will be of some importance in DAI, given we've seen Morrigan.

 

Mass Effect(s) would be better. There's a better argument that Arrival (? the last, bridging ME2 dlc) was necessary for the flow of the series' story, and that Javik should have been a non dlc companion.

 

Fallout 3 is probably even better though. Want an ending that makes any sense at all? $10, s'il vous plaît.

[Hurlshort]

Did they really fix Fallout 3's ending with DLC?  I never bought any of that stuff.  I agree on Mass Effect, it would be pretty confusing to start ME3 without playing that last DLC.  That being said, it was clearly taking part after the main story arc of 2.  

[Mamoulian War]

Have you always wanted to make your own Mortal Kombat or Street Fighter killer? Now you can...

 

http://www.siliconera.com/2013/12/03/want-make-fighting-game-now-can/

[Raithe]

Did they really fix Fallout 3's ending with DLC?  I never bought any of that stuff.  I agree on Mass Effect, it would be pretty confusing to start ME3 without playing that last DLC.  That being said, it was clearly taking part after the main story arc of 2.

Yup. The first Fallout3 DLC retconned the ending of FE3 so you survived. It also changed it so if you re-played the game from the start, there were options so you wouldn't die.

[NOK222]

 

 

Dragon Derp did it too. 

 

 

How so?  Dragon Age released a full expansion.  None of the DLC really impacted the story of the main games.

 

 

Shale, a character so important to the storyline of Orzamaar that she was featured in later novels. So important that the Dwarf PC of Inquisition has the surname Cadash. 

 

Shale was a pre-order DLC character. 

Edited December 5, 2013 by NKKKK

[alanschu]

featured in later novels.

Any chance the justification for said use in later novels is because she actually existed and shipped as a character and was popular among fans?

 

I think people give us a wee bit too much credit on having this large, epically scoped vision with all the details hammered out that they feel that because a character is featured in later literature it's somehow evidence of how important said character is in the franchise from Day One.

 

Though it's not uncommon for people to recognize this and attack BioWare for clearly not having a large epic plan.

 

 

Shale was a pre-order DLC character.

Shale was free to everyone that bought the game new, not just pre-order. It's more equivalent to the (now discontinued) Project Ten Dollar stuff that EA had on other titles. It's fine to hate that policy (EA has since scrapped it likely due to perception issues with it), but for a lot of people Stone Prisoner was just a part of the purchase for them.

 

Side note: there were also people that owned pirated copies of the game that actually bought Stone Prisoner, which I found interesting. I actually like things like Stone Prisoner as a way of incentivizing a new purchase, and greatly preferred it to Sebastian and Javik which were only included with preorders or special editions. But Project Ten Dollar has been scrapped so that sort of stuff won't be happening anymore.

[NOK222]

 

 

Any chance the justification for said use in later novels is because she actually existed and shipped as a character and was popular among fans?

 

Or Gaider giving characters he likes Plot Shields. 

[alanschu]

 

Any chance the justification for said use in later novels is because she actually existed and shipped as a character and was popular among fans?

 

Or Gaider giving characters he likes Plot Shields.

 

 

Is your position simply fueled by your ire towards a writer, because you didn't answer the question. Could Shale have been used in later content simply because Shale ended up getting released and was popular? Unless you'd prefer to somehow frame your straw man in a way that makes it a bit more relevant to the question.

 

This also doesn't factor in the delay the game received to be brought over to the consoles.

 

 

Furthermore, your position comes across as one of "I'd like the story DLC to be as meaningless as possible." Because if any DLC content contains interesting or possibly illuminating story elements, then it "should have been a part of the main game" and hence "given to the player for free." If you'd prefer we release more stuff like Horse Armor or the various item packs that Dragon Age did release, I'll be sure to pass along the information. Though it'll make those that want to consume more story content unhappy. Because we can release expansion content that is completely self contained and irrelevant to the main plot line... to which people complain that the content is irrelevant to the plot line and not referenced in other ways when it'd make sense to do so (Sebastian was actually lambasted for this on DA2, IIRC).

 

 

You can argue (as Zoraptor did) that some things probably shouldn't be done as DLC, such as Arrival. It's probably a bit too plot vital as it directly led to the narrative of the next sequel. But... does this mean that an "Expansion Pack" would also be irrelevant? If a Baldur's Gate 3 was made, it shouldn't factor in the events of Throne of Bhaal?

Edited December 5, 2013 by alanschu

[Zoraptor]

 

 

 

Dragon Derp did it too. 

 

 

How so?  Dragon Age released a full expansion.  None of the DLC really impacted the story of the main games.

 

 

Shale, a character so important to the storyline of Orzamaar that she was featured in later novels.

 

Oh come on. Orzamar's plot is not exactly central to the game, and her reactions are not much more central to it than, say, Leliana reacting to you defiling Andraste's Urn. If you had to buy Alistair it'd be a lot closer, but you don't.

 

Story dlcs are "damned if you do, damned if you don't" on their integration. Have a wholly peripheral thing like, uh, Golems of Amgarrak (?) and you get people complaining that it has no relevance and is a pointless cash grab, have an integrated and important story and it's a cynical cash grab instead where you only get the whole story if you pay extra.

[NOK222]

 

 

Furthermore, your position comes across as one of "I'd like the story DLC to be as meaningless as possible."

 

Whoa dude, someone's making outlandish claims here. 

 

 

 

 If you'd prefer we release more stuff like Horse Armor or the various item packs that Dragon Age did release, I'll be sure to pass along the information.

 

Stop being so passive aggressive there Phil Fish. It's not as simple as "WELL IF YOU DON'T LIKE THIS, WE'LL DO THIS INSTEAD, LITTLE ****TY FANS!" Seriously, this just shows a lack of judgement on developer's part. 

 

 

 

Oh come on. Orzamar's plot is not exactly central to the game

 

Are we talking about Dragon Age Origins here? The one where Orzammar was one of the four requisite places you had to secure an alliance with to beat the game?

[Zoraptor]

You can argue (as Zoraptor did) that some things probably shouldn't be done as DLC, such as Arrival.

 

I don't really have a problem with Arrival* being dlc, of those I listed I only really dislike the F3 one and I probably wouldn't even there if the ending were not so broken in the original. If I had a criticism it might be that it would be better suited to an 'episodic' type format where the expectation is that the episodes are all integral- and I do think that if you're going to have that sort of dlc you really need to have a good recap of important events between the games. Having Shepard be in jail at the start is otherwise a bit jarring.

 

*I haven't played it either, so I'm going on hearsay/ having read the plot summary as to its importance.

[Zoraptor]

 

 

Oh come on. Orzamar's plot is not exactly central to the game

 

Are we talking about Dragon Age Origins here? The one where Orzammar was one of the four requisite places you had to secure an alliance with to beat the game?

 

Yep, I am. It has effectively no relevance to the overarching plot except providing an alliance, and Shale is peripheral to that goal since she's separate from the Harrowmont/ Bhelen choice. Alistair, otoh, could be a king/ spouse/ PC spouse/ sacrifice/ alcoholic bum- all except the last one being very important to the overall plot- as well as providing background and interaction with Eamon/ Teagan. Shale's about equivalent to Wynne or Leliana in importance, nice to have, but not by any means essential.

[NOK222]

Well ****, they might as well have released Orzommar, Wynne and Lelianna as DLCs as well, since they're not relevant. 

[alanschu]

I don't really have a problem with Arrival* being dlc, of those I listed I only really dislike the F3 one and I probably wouldn't even there if the ending were not so broken in the original. If I had a criticism it might be that it would be better suited to an 'episodic' type format where the expectation is that the episodes are all integral- and I do think that if you're going to have that sort of dlc you really need to have a good recap of important events between the games. Having Shepard be in jail at the start is otherwise a bit jarring.

It's funny because I was actually oblivious to Arrival (I haven't worked on the ME franchise at all) so my assumption was the Shepard was imprisoned because "You did run off with Cerberus there, chief" haha.

 

But yeah, I do agree that it needs to be done carefully, and I definitely agree it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" type of perspective. In this case, however, my gut says "make DLC that people will WANT to play" is a more preferred solution towards DLC.

 

I may be biased, however, as I rarely buy DLC. The only BioWare game I got DLC for was Citadel, and before that my last DLC purchase was the FONV DLCs (which are pretty excellently done IMO). They supplemented some plots (provided more insight into Veronica's relationships, for example), though also still fit into the base game pretty well. Although I find open world games tend to work a bit better with "isolated content" but could just be because that's most of my experience.

[NOK222]

Obsidian did it right with their DLCs. It provided an overreaching plot, but each story was self contained. They just...do it better. 

[TSBasilisk]

PC Gaming Alliance to certify games starting March 2014

 

If you didn't know/forgot, this is an organization with backing from various big-name companies with an interest in keeping PC gaming alive and growing. A PCGA-certified game will be able to deliver all advertised and expected features, and also that it's not a broken pile of dung.

 

The certification fee may keep indie developers from approaching it at first, but they rely more on word-of-mouth than anything. This is really more for large-scale releases where there have been disasters recently, i.e., Ashes, War Z, Sim Cities, etc.

[alanschu]

Curious how they will know it meets the criteria if they don't test it themselves.

[Malcador]

So it's a sticker that can be bought ?

[Lexx]

 

Did they really fix Fallout 3's ending with DLC?  I never bought any of that stuff.  I agree on Mass Effect, it would be pretty confusing to start ME3 without playing that last DLC.  That being said, it was clearly taking part after the main story arc of 2.

Yup. The first Fallout3 DLC retconned the ending of FE3 so you survived. It also changed it so if you re-played the game from the start, there were options so you wouldn't die.

 

 

It was Broken Steel, the last DLC, not the first. The first one was a horrible corridor shooter.

 

I never played any other ME2 DLCs and had no real problem with following the events in ME3. Though, it might also be because the story was stupid anyway... no idea.

[Orogun01]

So it's a sticker that can be bought ?

Let's not assume malfeasance immediately. Maybe the ask for proof of testing, or have their own test groups double check it.

The problem is that this is voluntary, so it will only work if enough publisher/developers sign on or enough consumers know about it.

[alanschu]

Due to the open nature of the platform, it will never be able to be mandatory IMO.

 

(which is a good thing.  As much as first party compliance is handy for consoles for preventing ET type stuff, it's damned expensive and creates barriers to some games being developed and released).

[BruceVC]

http://gamingbolt.com/15-role-playing-games-to-look-forward-to-in-2014

 

Take a look at this list for anticipated RPG's for 2014, wow if this list is accurate then we are REALLY going to spoilt for 2014

 

I knew about most of them except Darkest Dungeon at the end, that does look interesting

[Undecaf]

2/15 of any interest (Witcher 3 and PE) and they didn't even include Wasteland 2.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Undecaf

[BruceVC]

2/15 of any interest, and they didn't even include Wasteland 2.

 

That's true, they did  leave that out and that's an egregious mistake. But there are some good ones in the list. These include PE, DA:I, Witcher 3, ME4, Fallout 4 and Dark Souls 2

 

Also I don't recognize any game unless there is a PC version

[ShadySands]

Here is my list

 

Project Eternity

DA:I

Wasteland 2

Dead State

Shadowrun Dragonfall

TWitcher 3

Divinity:OS

 

and that's it... probably

 

 

EDIT: I do doubt ME4 being next year but it would be in my list

Edited December 5, 2013 by ShadySands