3 expansions ......really?

[Voss]

Back in the day when we got an expansion, it was like getting another game, with tons of content, updates to the graphics, new charactesr new locations.

White M Arch was done very well with a completely new area. The Witcher series did an incredible job with BLOOD and WINE and hearts of stone. The amount of content in each of these expansions were amazing.

So... 'Back in the day' meaning... 2015 to 2016? And specifically the prequel to this very game. Ok?

 

DLC just puts a sour taste in my mouth especially comming from a kickstarter cRPG which was designed to appeal to older players and nostalgia of Baldurs gate ice wind dale and planescape. 

 

Hopefully I AM PROVEN WRONG!

White March was exactly this for a Kickstarter cRPG. You just said it was very well done.

Pick a stance for at least one post.

 

 

There are concerns with some of Obsidians dlc practices (Tyranny), but ranting about how terrible the practice is and citing ones you think were excellent is just...bizarre.

[rheingold]

While I really liked Witcher 3, the idea that they did DLC "properly" and other studios should follow them is misguided to say the least. Most of the free dlc, was cosmetic or made really minor changes, and if they had attempted to charge for it - there would have been hell to pay. In fact, the whole free 14 pieces of dlc was quite a cynical (and successful marketing ploy). Not that I minded, it was free after all...

 

Regarding the expansions, they were great, but no better value for money than White March.

Exactly how the Deadfire dlc is going to turn out is all speculation at this point. I do, however find it really hard to believe that Obs are going to attempt to rip off their customers by selling sub par dlc. If nothing else, that's a incredibly bad business decision, and they have been making games long enough to understand their base.

 

So personally while I don't like the idea of 3 small dlc packs as opposed to one large one I reckon they will work out just fine.

Edited April 26, 2018 by rheingold

[rheingold]

****ing hell. DLC largely exists because you need to make content freezes in order to establish the project's scope. A ton of potential content is devised during pre-planning, content that looks to be increasingly un-viable is cut as the project advances.

 

Josh Recently had a great discussion about crunch and over-time and how you can actually loose productivity from Crunching. So to avoid those scenarios you need to establish a realistic scope of the project and design the project in a way where you can cut away content in order to salvage the major and most important parts of a project.

 

Once the artists and designers are done with the main-game and the game is moving into it's final development and testing stages. They can then jump back into the production pipeline on either new content (so they aren't idle) or pickup where they left off on cut content (once again, to not be idle.) That content will never be ready for the final game, but it was selectively cut because it was some form of side-content.

 

Obsidian also knew in advance that they we're making DLC for this game, so it's no surprise that they might over-plan side content, with the the anticipation that some of it would be cut and would be reworked into sizable meaty chunks of content that could come out later. At least this way whatever future content that they come out with, it's gone through a degree of work and refinement during the largest pre-planning stages. Just as all world builders should do, you design more than you write about.

 

Let's not imply cutting content is a way to create "to be sold later DLC content." Let's not wax-concerns over some none-existent dubious nature of Obsidian's development.

Please refrain from bring logic into this! You're interfering with a darn good rant.

[master guardian]

well in 12 days all our ranting frustrations will be over, 

 

lets all just enjoy the game because games like this dont come around to often

 

thankyou obsidian for giving this to us

 

cant wait for may 8th

[Achilles]

 

.Fallout New Vegas is basicaly releasing in five waves and you gotta pay each time

That's just nonsense.

Fixed

[SonicMage117]

Please refrain from bring logic into this! You're interfering with a darn good rant.

Tis the forums after all, only when we favor something do we deem it logical or relevant. Everything else is discarded

[Yosharian]

People are just touchy about this because most companies charge extra for game content that's ready at launch e.g. Bioware

[Verenti]

My problem with the expansions is that they seem less like substantial content (you know, an expansion pack) and more like a few quests and a dungeon or two.

 

Personally, and, if I recall correctly, according to that DLC survey, I am not in the minority here, I'd rather one big expansion like White March or Throne of Bhaal than a series of smaller ones that are disparate in theme and content. I'm being optimistic here, but I bought the expansion pass for more Pillars. However, I don't mean that I just want more busy work to do, but rather I want more of the best parts of Pillars. If its just dungeons with a quest line that is just another quest line then... why bother? I mean, definitely bother because I already paid for it.

 

I'm a bit cautious about what I've heard so far, but I'll happily be wrong.

[Valmy]

People are just touchy about this because most companies charge extra for game content that's ready at launch e.g. Bioware

 

Yeah I was going to say. Gamers are super paranoid they are getting screwed these days. Every announcement Obsidian makes has a subset gnashing their teeth and trying to figure out how this means they are getting screwed.

 

Probably reasonable with how things are going.

[CottonWolf]

My problem with the expansions is that they seem less like substantial content (you know, an expansion pack) and more like a few quests and a dungeon or two.

 

Personally, and, if I recall correctly, according to that DLC survey, I am not in the minority here, I'd rather one big expansion like White March or Throne of Bhaal than a series of smaller ones that are disparate in theme and content. I'm being optimistic here, but I bought the expansion pass for more Pillars. However, I don't mean that I just want more busy work to do, but rather I want more of the best parts of Pillars. If its just dungeons with a quest line that is just another quest line then... why bother? I mean, definitely bother because I already paid for it.

 

I'm a bit cautious about what I've heard so far, but I'll happily be wrong.

 

I think this is the reasonable "I'm worried" take, and more or less where I am too. I don't particularly want to pay piecemeal for single quests with no overarching story. I mean, perhaps each content drop will be significant enough to make it worth it, I certainly hope so. But we've all seen DLC horror stories, and this emphatically isn't the same as the White March. It sounds more like the Tyranny DLC, which I thought was content light and uninteresting.

Edited April 27, 2018 by CottonWolf

[Clean&Clear]

 

My problem with the expansions is that they seem less like substantial content (you know, an expansion pack) and more like a few quests and a dungeon or two.

 

Personally, and, if I recall correctly, according to that DLC survey, I am not in the minority here, I'd rather one big expansion like White March or Throne of Bhaal than a series of smaller ones that are disparate in theme and content. I'm being optimistic here, but I bought the expansion pass for more Pillars. However, I don't mean that I just want more busy work to do, but rather I want more of the best parts of Pillars. If its just dungeons with a quest line that is just another quest line then... why bother? I mean, definitely bother because I already paid for it.

 

I'm a bit cautious about what I've heard so far, but I'll happily be wrong.

 

I think this is the reasonable "I'm worried" take, and more or less where I am too. I don't particularly want to pay piecemeal for single quests with no overarching story. I mean, perhaps each content drop will be significant enough to make it worth it, I certainly hope so. But we've all seen DLC horror stories, and this emphatically isn't the same as the White March. It sounds more like the Tyranny DLC, which I thought was content light and uninteresting.

 

 

Tyranny is owned by Paradox, their DLC practises are well known, but there's not really any reason to be worried that it would somehow change Obsidian's approach to DLCs.

 

I personally don't see where all these concerns for the amount of content in the DLCs are coming from, WM 1&2 are sold together at 24E, Season pass for Deadfire was announced to be sold at 25$ I believe, se roughly the same, which indicates the 3 Deadfire DLCs combined could be about the same size as WM 1&2 combined, what's the problem here?

 

The only appropriate concern I see is for people that like one big meaty expansion, yeah, we are not getting that this time around. I guess it's a matter of taste and you can never make everyone happy with a thing like this, because tastes differ. I personally don't mind 3 separate shorter stories, an example that springs to mind is Durlag's Tower in BG 1, imo that was a brilliant area and size-wise it could be around the same as the upcoming DLCs for Deadfire, so I'm fine with that.

 

Also, the teased stories sound really cool, and 3 separate stories also mean some nice environment variety. Looking forward to them.

[Yosharian]

My problem with the expansions is that they seem less like substantial content (you know, an expansion pack) and more like a few quests and a dungeon or two.

 

Personally, and, if I recall correctly, according to that DLC survey, I am not in the minority here, I'd rather one big expansion like White March or Throne of Bhaal than a series of smaller ones that are disparate in theme and content

So the DLCs for Deadfire are all small bits of content? How do you know this?

[huang]

 

Personally, and, if I recall correctly, according to that DLC survey, I am not in the minority here, I'd rather one big expansion like White March or Throne of Bhaal than a series of smaller ones

 

Overall it's probably smarter to do several smaller ones than just one big one, because that has the danger that people won't like it and then that's all there is. Given how extremely... let's say FICKLE "rpg fans" are, there is a good chance even this bunch will like at least one of the 3 (and of course everyone will like a different one out of the 3).

[vrapan]

So do we know if the DLCs include a few extra abilities and increased level cap?

[Boeroer]

Nope. Nothing substancial unfortunately.

[nightcobra]

I'm guessing if there are new abilities in the DLCs they'll be quest related like the watcher powers or the scalebreaker ability in POE1

Edited April 27, 2018 by nightcobra

[AndreaColombo]

I too would generally prefer a meaty expansion WM-style, but if it’s quality content I don’t super mind the format. Three smaller DLCs on par with Durlag’s Tower quality-wise would be a godsend.

[Archaven]

I too would generally prefer a meaty expansion WM-style, but if it’s quality content I don’t super mind the format. Three smaller DLCs on par with Durlag’s Tower quality-wise would be a godsend.

 

Me too preferring meaty expansions. If the DLCs were mid-sized and highly replayable (adding a different playmode for example) that would be awesomely awesome.

[AndyW85]

You would think to say I am obsessed with anything to do with pirates, and anything to do with story and character driven RPG's, that I would have bought this by now, however...

 

There are THREE DLC's being released in the next 6 months... wtf Obsidian? I don't know why, but I expected better than this. Just make a complete game and release it in November instead of releasing it in chunks between May and November.

 

As I likely will only be able to spare enough time to play through this once, releasing it in chunks is just making me not want to buy it until it's all out so I can do everything in one go.

 

Just finish the whole thing and charge more for it. Can you at least tell me if I can play JUST the DLC's that are being released without having to go through the whole game again or whether they'll be integrated into the main story?

[Big-Ben]

Speaking only for myself I would rather Obsidian release DLC down the line with all the fixings than just shoot stuff out of a cannon with yet more content while the core issues remain unresolved. The DLC as far as I know is also not complete so it hasn't been cut out to be sold for parts. Sawyer isn't even directing it.

[Wormerine]

If you are going to play it once only, then better wait anyway. Some patches are needed.

[master guardian]

Good points raised OP

 

I to would l8ke a big completed game straight up.

 

I support your point and and stunned that the usual negative aggressive people on this forum haven’t come out and started attacking you for writing such a subjective post.

 

Maybe it is still early morning hours in the US and they are still sleeping.

Edited May 16, 2018 by master guardian

[algroth]

DLCs = expansions. Unless you consider that Shadows of Amn was incomplete without Throne of Bhaal, or Neverwinter Nights 2 without Mask of the Betrayer and Storm of Zehir, or the first Pillars without the White March games, I don't see how anything has changed here and why you can't look at Deadfire as a complete game and the future DLCs as merely additions to the existing content.

[Isokon]

I don't quite understand how waiting until November for a single release is effectively different from waiting until November for all DLC to be released.

[Blarghagh]

Expansions were announced and planned from the get-go in the FIG campaign.