EA Mandates Online, DLC for Every Game in 2011

Status
Not open for further replies.

hawk56013

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2009
1
0
18,510
I think it's a decent idea, but i would rather have a game, say Mass Effect 3, have all the effort put into the story and gameplay mechanics rather than online multiplayer. Although Mass Effect multiplayer would be awesome!
 

Kami3k

Distinguished
Jan 17, 2008
575
0
18,930
FUCK, so that's what they mean by the "far reaching" for mass effect. Online play, booo.

And only a complete retard could say Mass Effect MP would be anything but complete garbage. Hello, how is the combat again? Sorry but hawk you are nothing but a MP retard. Not everything needs MP, and almost all the games out there with MP, shouldn't have MP because it sucks.

MP would only take away from the actual game. Man how I hate MP retards like hawk, where ever game must have MP. Stop ruining gaming tyvm, oh and diaf.
 

Antimatter79

Distinguished
Jul 24, 2009
103
0
18,640
MP or no MP, blanket mandates such as "online play" simply will not work in gaming. However, if they HAVE to mandate something, mandate DX10 graphics options for those who can use it.
 

Zagen30

Distinguished
Dec 24, 2008
23
0
18,560
No. Just no. This is a terrible move on EA's part. I'm not saying a game can't have multiplayer, but there are some games that just don't warrant more than one person playing at a time. Forcing all of their development studios to do this will more than likely lessen the overall quality of their titles.
 

maurath55

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2009
9
0
18,510
im suprised you guys are not talking about the dlc. dlc almost always costs, so the way i see it now they are gonna take every little bit of extra out of the game and now you will have to pay even more for it. Nothing but a money grab.
 

gorehound

Distinguished
Jan 16, 2009
276
0
18,930
Yup another greedbag company who will suck as much money out of their releases as possible.
now not only will you pay $50 or so but you will also get charged to download DLC which you may need to play said game and then the multiplayer part which do not be surprised if it is tied into their company servers to make you pay more.
 

Honis

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2009
383
0
18,930
Financially, it is a sound decision. They release a shell of a game for $60, then sell the bits they chopped off for $10. Before you know it, they've made $20-$40 more off you because the only redeeming factor is the online play, where the bandwagon community almost requires you to buy the latest DLC to play with them. The model has worked for year in MMOs.

People ask me why I never buy a DLC...
 

ryanjm

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2007
36
0
18,580
Bad idea to require it. Pretty transparent attempt to increase profit by lessening the number of people who pirate a game.
 

Kami3k

Distinguished
Jan 17, 2008
575
0
18,930
[citation][nom]soc8765[/nom]Fuck EA and all the corporations that are screwing us. The developers should gain independence from those corporate fucktards.[/citation]

And how do you suggest developer actually RELEASE the games they develop? Hiring 100s of more people to open up their own publishing division costing way more money in the end?

Good job in thinking that thought through! *thumbs up*
 

Kami3k

Distinguished
Jan 17, 2008
575
0
18,930
[citation][nom]Honis[/nom]Before you know it, they've made $20-$40 more off you because the only redeeming factor is the online play, where the bandwagon community almost requires you to buy the latest DLC to play with them. The model has worked for year in MMOs.People ask me why I never buy a DLC...[/citation]

Because your a idiotic cheap ass? MMO xpacks as DLC? Ya xpacks that can nearly double the content of a game is really DLC not worth 30-40 dollars. ROFL.

As much I would hate having Mass Effect and other games like it with multiplayer, I'm not going around talking stupidity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.