Dragon Age - Up to 2 Years DLC Planned

Dhruin

SasqWatch
Joined
August 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
An interesting mini-interview at MTV with BioWare's Greg Zeschuk telling them they plan up to 2 years' worth of DLC for Dragon Age:
MTV Multiplayer: Different game developers have had different strategies for DLC and gamers have had varying reactions. What’s BioWare’s philosophy on DLC?
Greg Zeschuk: We have a very strong philosophy — it’s got to be valuable. This is one of the most important things that we believe: anything we give to our consumers, like to sell to them, whether it’s smaller or bigger, if you’re selling something to someone it’s got to be good and it’s got to be a certain value for the money they’re paying for it.
You have to remember that video game consumers are some of the smartest, most connected people on the planet. You can’t trick them with anything, so don’t even try. I don’t think it’s so much as to trick them, as it is the strategy behind it has to be fully thought out. This is the reason that with “Dragon Age,” our DLC strategy is doing it in maybe a year and-a-half or two years, planning exactly when you’re going to do it and how you’re going to do it. Some of our fans would really like us to extend the world, so it’s going to be something that will make the world even bigger and more interesting. It’s not going to wreck it or break it.
...in related news, the official site has a list of GDC coverage, in case you missed something:

  • USA Today: Dragon Age: Origins Named a GDC "Blockbuster"
  • GameSpot: Dragon Age: Origins Impressions
  • G4: Extended Look at BioWare's Latest RPG
  • IGN: Dragon Age: Origins Preview
  • GameDaily: Role-Playing for the Masses
  • GameSpy: Coming Into Focus
More information.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
Am I the only one annoyed by this whole DLC thing getting popular?
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2008
Messages
1,718
Location
Dear Green Place
My reading of that was that they are planning to take 1.5 - 2 years after release before releasing any DLC.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
473
Location
Australia
Am I the only one annoyed by this whole DLC thing getting popular?

You're not alone. I'm more troubled by the prospect of games becoming thinner and thinner at largely the same price while the full volume of content is chiseled off into DLC.

I don't know that I've come across any titles that are outright guilty of this, but I can think of a few that come close (I'll be nice and not start a flame war by mentioning them).
 
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
118
Haha DLC, they been planning this game for what seems like 8 years! Dlc should take what, 3 or 4? People will be playing on platforms that no longer support their game
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,397
Location
USA-Michigan
Am I the only one annoyed by this whole DLC thing getting popular?

I agree with you. This is getting ridiculous.

I'm the kind of gamer that wait until a game is apparently patched for the last time before playing it. It was bad enough with patches, but these DLC things make it worse since I'm not intererested in replaying a game, or even just get back to a game months later, simply for a small new bit of content.
 
Joined
Dec 3, 2007
Messages
113
Hey, DLC is OPTIONAL!! I have never bought any, and doubt I ever will, so don't sweat over it. If the original game is worthy, buy it. If not, don't and forget about DLC; it won't make a poor game any better!!
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
12,806
Location
Australia
See how much it costs and what it is, first. Whether it's horse armor or a new area or what, and whether it's five bucks or free or some other complex variation thereof.

Knowing what I know, I'm pleased, but I've seen enough things change (scope cuts, pricing changes) that I will in no way be talking about it before someone publicly announces what it is.

Except (he says, dangerously coming close to a line) that the goal of Dragon Age's DLC is to get you to keep playing the game, or at least keep you coming back periodically, until the next game ships. We don't have multiplayer, so the only way to do that, beyond making it a good game to start with, is to make DLC that you want to get and play. You can't do that with horse armor. And there's a sizable chunk of the team that has already moved off of the main game (as in, for several months now) and onto the DLC.

(No argument about DLC in general. I liked the free Neverwinter modules released by the team. I never bought premium modules, though. I've never paid for DLC in my life, and don't see it happening soon, except possibly if I get Rock Band.)
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2006
Messages
261
A lot of DLC for a game which - so everybody assumes - will have a huge installed base is without a doubt a clever business decision.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,830
I agree with both Patrick and Gorath. I wouldn't buy horse armor, etc, nor would I buy something like The Pitt- heck, why would I? I reached the level cap LONG before the end of FO3 so what incentive do I have. However, I bought both both expansions for NWN and if they had been a form of DLC I would still have bought them. With Team Corwin, we have played nearly every half decent MP mod ever made and a few adapted SP mods as well. That sort of DLC does keep me playing the game. Pity there's no MP with DM facility Patrick, that was the greatest innovation Bioware ever created which was totally nerfed in NWN2.
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
12,806
Location
Australia
Personally, I prefer expansion packs to DLC. Usually better value for the money and usually grander scope. I have payed for DLC but only on very rare occasions where the value was present. I want to see what they have to offer before buying but I assume they are are going to do more than just horse armor. I want to at least play the game first before deciding if I want DLC. If there is replay value then we can talk DLC.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
33
I have no problem with DLC at all, as long as the original game doesn't feel cheap or incomplete.

I don't see the DLC releases as something I was cheated for when I bought the original game, since the development of the DLC will have taken place after the original release, and the cost for developing it wasn't included in the budget for the original game. Developing game content cost a lot of money - someone has paid for the piece of DLC to be developed, and therefore it's completely fair to charge money for it. And as Corwin says, it's optional.. buy it if you want it, otherwise leave it.

From a developers point of view I can easily understand why it is done. I mean, at the moment the industry suffers from incredibly high production costs for games of the quality that people has come to expect - both regarding features, polish and graphics. So either you score a *major* hit, or you will be in trouble due to the high start-up cost of a game production. However, once you're actually near the end of a project the team will be extremely efficient with the tools, the engine and the asset pipeline. So developing small pieces of high quality additional content can maybe be done relatively cheap for the company.. and it's a way to try and minimize the risk of a major financial failure :)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
453
Here's my take:

There's nothing inherently wrong with the concept of DLC - and as with most things, it's all about how you put it into practice.

There's no mystery related to why developers are headed this way, as it's undoubtedly a relatively low-cost way of getting extra profit.

I doubt many of us have any illusions about Bioware and their motivations for being in the business these days, so I don't see any element of surprise here, nor a reason to be disappointed.
 
I am a strong hater of DLC. It just doesn't work.

Since the way I look at a game, when I play through a game no matter which one it is, I want a complete experiance from beginning to end, I am not interessed in a DLC which adds one area I already completed the story and my playthrough of the game...... Episodic content which continue the story is another thing though........
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
6,292
No problem with DLC at all.

If the game isn't a complete experience for my money out of the box then I won't buy it. If it is, and DLC extends that, then I'll buy the DLC or not, dependant on how much value it gives me. Market forces work well :)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,877
Hmmm - Let's see just how much DLC we get. Mass Effect DLC ? We got promised a lot of DLC for Mass Effect - so far we've only get 1 DLC - about the Batarians.

Let's hope that the DLC for DA: Origins will be more than for Mass Effect....
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,147
Location
Denmark, Europe
So, does that mean we'll get a 8-10 hours campaign coming with the original game, soon to be filled with DLC packs? :p
 
Joined
Dec 24, 2006
Messages
9
Location
Italy
I fear that things won't be translated ("oh, that again !").
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,908
Location
Old Europe
My primary issue with DLC is that they usually fall into the category of "too little, too late". By the time the Bring Down the Sky DLC arrived for Mass Effect I had already completed the game 3½ times AND it had been collecting dust on the shelf for more than 2 months. The same was true for the Fable 2 DLC, the Overlord DLC and let's not forget about Episode 1 and 2 for Half Life 2.

The Tomb Raider Underworld DLC and the Prince of Persia Epilogue was timed better ... too bad I got the PC version of both and the DLCs are only for the Xbox360.

However, the almost weekly track packs for music games like Rock Band, Guitar Hero, Libs or whatnot is a great way to keep the games fresh. I know that comparing a story based campaign for an RPG with a few tracks of 3-5 minutes each, is very unfair ... but perhaps the point is that certain games are suited for DLC while others are not.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
805
Location
Just outside of Copenhagen
Back
Top Bottom