Who is waiting for the Skyrim Game of the Year edition?

[thedevildancer]

really just buy and then buy the dlc worth every penny and then some

 

[ResonanceGames]

I found most of the DLC for Oblivion to be inferior to a lot of the free content I got from the modding community, so I doubt I'll buy enough content to feel bad about not waiting for a GOTY edition. I suspect there will be one large expansion ala Shivering Isles, and that's the one expansion I plan on getting.

If it turns out differently, oh well. I spent more than what I paid for Skyrim at the bar this weekend. 30 extra bucks for more good content is not a big deal.

 

[walrusaurus]

Tomato, tahmahto. were basically saying the same thing with differently skewn perspectives.

But i do take issue with claiming Skyrim to be one of them.

So please tell me your rationale extends well beyond "cause I like it" because Bethesda is quickly turning into the Activision of RPGs. Seriously, Bethesda is starting to emerge as an organization of merit when it comes to setting bad precedents. So I fail to see a reason for excusing that behavior, and neither the existence of the elder scrolls or the fallout franchises are able to validate that.

Because of the size of the base game, and my assumptions regarding the timing of the DLC. I'm assuming we'll see a small mission pack in a month or so for christmas, and then some big knights of the nine/shivering isles style ones next year. My point is that the game itself is an excellent value: it provides vastly more content than 99% of other single player games. Additionally, content developed after release, for an obviously completed game, can only be considered 'bonus.' I admit that this is a vague standard, and relativistic to the perception of the individual consumer, as to what constitutes a sufficiently completed game. I think our issue is that you conceive of DLC as always and inherently being an omission from the base game. While i would argue that in some cases DLC is simply icing for die hard fans.

We're basically arguing whether the glass is half-full or half-empty. You say it's always half empty, and I'm saying it depends on how big the glass is, and what its full of.

 

[viranimus]

We're basically arguing whether the glass is half-full or half-empty. You say it's always half empty, and I'm saying it depends on how big the glass is, and what its full of.

No, Im sorry, but your missing the point all together. If the DLC continues the narrative of the base game, the base game is not complete. If that narrative expanding DLC will inevitably be condensed and repackaged as one inclusive product, that is an incomplete value that will see customers who bought the base game before the addition of the DLC willingly pay for the same thing twice, or buy two different versions (limited and expanded) of the same product.

Now granted, it is impossible to 100% KNOW if the DLC will expand the narrative or not but if NV, F3 and TESIV are usable as evidence all signs point to skyrim doing the exact same thing.

You can try to view it what ever way you wish but it is an incomplete value the moment the publisher releases a version that includes that "icing" content with the original base game. Granted, it has not happened yet, but all signs make it abundantly clear it WILL eventually happen. So if your willing to wait a year for the entire game to be released, its incomplete. The only ones who can see it as complete are those who were too impatient to wait for the entire game to be released and are willingly going to pay the publisher double thanks to that DLC and buying the base game outright.

Here is the crux. You have to determine, if any element of the DLC becomes Canon. If anything becomes canon, then someone playing the stand alone base game is missing part of the story/backstory/lore.

Spoiler: An example

In Skyrim, there is a moment when you encounter the Daedric peimce of Insanity, which arguably happens to be the player from Oblivion who acted as Shegoroaths protege, and in turn essentially came to fill the role Shegororath once filled. Something specific players would have no frame of reference without first playing "the shivering Isles"


So can you really say that whole exchange which is part of the base of skyrim is relevant without having the context that was only supplied by the expansion of the narrative of Oblivion? Or by making it a part of the canon of skyrim, it means that the base game of oblivion is a fractured incomplete product without the shivering isles.

Im not seeing this as a glass analogy, I am seeing based on the precedents Betheda has set for themselves by themselves that is quantifiable to an author selling a book that takes you up to the climax of the story, but charging you for the individual chapters related to falling action and resolution. Sure, you'll get the most important jist of the story, but you'll have to pay extra to see the impact and effects of the climax.

I think it goes without saying now that this point of view is anything but the ignorant saber rattling of someone who just hasn't thought their position out fully. regardless how long it takes them to release the entire game, even if portions of it are episodic content, to go without that content is incomplete without question. Ive said what I set out to. Your free to accept it or choose to ignore it as you wish, but that is as much as I need to say on it.

edit: 90% of all statistics are made up on the spot. thats why Im confident that short 5 hour campaigns do NOT actually make up 99% of all single player affairs in gaming and know that they only make up a small fraction of it.

 

[Bocaj2000]

It's better than trying to convince myself that everything is fine when it isn't. And no, no it doesn't, if the industry does something that I don't agree with (i.e. DLC) I just don't bother partaking in it.

So you dont agree with companies selling you extra entirely optional content? Ya some companies do the Day 1 dlc rather badly, but with Oblivion they did it quite well. The horse armor mistake is well known, and has been talked about tons, but Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine were well made and definatly worth the money, Shivering Isles in particular since there was so much content.

Also ya..unnecessary hosility is unnecessary.

No I don't agree with it, the fact it's optional carries no weight to me. Even the likes of shivering isles aren't good value, it's just not worth an additional 20% on the purchase price, you could buy another entire game on steam for that. Like dlc, my posts are optional, if you don't like them, don't read them.

I am actually curious why optional content bothers you so much. Also, if the industry were to replace the phrase "DLC" with "expansion pack," would that bother you less? If not, what is your solution?

 

[walrusaurus]

No, Im sorry, but your missing the point all together. If the DLC continues the narrative of the base game, the base game is not complete. If that narrative expanding DLC will inevitably be condensed and repackaged as one inclusive product, that is an incomplete value that will see customers who bought the base game before the addition of the DLC willingly pay for the same thing twice, or buy two different versions (limited and expanded) of the same product.

Problem is you don't actually save any money by buying the GOTY edition. By the time that the GOTY edition comes out the value of the base game will have depreciated to 30-35 dollars, meaning that by buying the special edition your paying a premium on top of the base value at the time of purchase anyways.

Now granted, it is impossible to 100% KNOW if the DLC will expand the narrative or not but if NV, F3 and TESIV are usable as evidence all signs point to skyrim doing the exact same thing.

I don't see how Shivering isles or knights of the nine in any way expanded the narrative of TES4. Neither had anything even remotely to do with Mehrunes Dagon, the Crimson Dawn, Martin Septim, etc.

Unless your proposing to the DLC not have a narrative of its own, in which case what's the point?

Here is the crux. You have to determine, if any element of the DLC becomes Canon. If anything becomes canon, then someone playing the stand alone base game is missing part of the story/backstory/lore.

*snip*shivering isles example*snip*

So can you really say that whole exchange which is part of the base of skyrim is relevant without having the context that was only supplied by the expansion of the narrative of Oblivion? Or by making it a part of the canon of skyrim, it means that the base game of oblivion is a fractured incomplete product without the shivering isles.

So by extension of this argument Skyrim GOTY-Ed. is an incomplete value without Oblivion, which is itself incomplete without Morrowind, and so on.
If you apply such a standard de rigueur to all peripheral content in a game, the ramifications quickly become ridiculous.

So we're clear I agree with you with regards to hypothetical DLC content that serves as part of the games core narrative. The recent Deus Ex DLC comes to mind; it was clearly cut from the base game for the purposes of added revenue. However, i disagree with you when it comes to content that is self contained and/or serves to deepen the setting generally, (The Shivering Isles for Oblivion, or Festival of Blood for Infamous).

 

[walrusaurus]

I am actually curious why optional content bothers you so much. Also, if the industry were to replace the phrase "DLC" with "expansion pack," would that bother you less? If not, what is your solution?

amusing side note. For the PS3 'The Shivering Isles' was originally sold as an expansion. I bought it at gamestop, had its own disc and boxart and everything.

 

[SharpDog]

ok so why does the original game fall to less than $30 when the GOTY edition comes out for the $60 including the original content ?

If they sold the DLC for less $$$$ and it could be added to the original then there would be a point to that. The DLC alone does cost generally about $30 when you buy it separately so they are basically forcing you to purchase the original content 2x.

That is my main beef with this scheme. And I have participated in it more than 4x in the past, not any more. I waited around 2 years for Fallout New Vegas and I'll wait for Skyrim GOTY. BTW I have multiple PS3 consoles and I have purchased a separate game for each console. I am a software developer myself and I don't begrudge SW Devs their money. I jost don't like getting ripped off.

 

[BeHeDDeR]

So am I. I am also hoping the glitches and problems will be ironed out. I finished with all the achievements but not all the missions becuase of the problems with the game. I know there are more achievements in the dlc. But franky I was disgusted with all the glitches and unfinished product. Yes I love the game but not all the little problems! It really takes away from the game and makes me think twice about buying another Bethesda game again.

 

[xefaros]

I am waiting for GOTY edition also just because simply enough for the lack of content and disproportional price tag(currently).Oblivion and fallout 3 had more content on their release date compaired to skyrim plus infinite quest.It was small and way too scripted,u didnt searched for adventure,adventure was finding you
Bugs and eye candy doesnt have any merit on my decision.

 

[Soxafloppin]

Yea I am, not something I'd normally do but I wasn't really interested when it came out but just floating about the forums, reading about the game and stuff has got me more interested, at this point its just better to wait.

 

[hoboman29]

Skyrim is still $60 on steam of all places so I'm gonna wait a while to justify paying $60 for it. (Don't have money to buy at full price)

 

[Lilani]

We're basically arguing whether the glass is half-full or half-empty. You say it's always half empty, and I'm saying it depends on how big the glass is, and what its full of.

No, Im sorry, but your missing the point all together. If the DLC continues the narrative of the base game, the base game is not complete.

So the first Back to the Future movie wasn't complete because the sequels continued the base narrative? I could understand this being an issue if the base narrative was left incomplete, as in loose strings that haven't been tied up. But merely continuing the story is possible without the original story being left incomplete.

Here is the crux. You have to determine, if any element of the DLC becomes Canon. If anything becomes canon, then someone playing the stand alone base game is missing part of the story/backstory/lore.

So expansion packs are out of the question too, then? Look, I don't like DLC in many forms, but Skyrim was a pretty big and pretty complete game to start with. I didn't feel shorted, and I certainly don't feel entitled to get any expansions or mini-sequels for free. I think there is a battle to be fought as far as what should and shouldn't be DLC, but I think you've chosen the wrong game to pick a fight with. If you don't think there was enough to Skyrim to call it a complete game, then you must be playing a totally different game from everybody else. And if you feel like any extra content they make for the game, including extra storylines, which they worked on after the completion of the game should be given to you for free, then you must be very conceited.

Again, I bring up Back to the Future as an example. I paid for all three of my BTTF movies on DVD separately. They were made separately, and they were sold separately. There were big box sets available, but it was cheaper for me to pay for them separately. Would it be fair of me to go to Universal and say I deserve BTTF 2 and 3 because I paid for 1, and those films continue the storyline? No. Because again, they were made separately. And even though they continue the storyline, I am not entitled to them because they were made on their own time and budget.

If your logic is "If it continues the storyline, then it should be included the original game," then you don't have a beef with just DLC. You have a beef with every sequel in every continuous franchise that's ever been made.

 

[Conn1496]

Yeah! I've always wanted a new frisbee!
Sarcasm aside, no. Skyrim will never live up to any of the previous elder scrolls games.
To be honest, I'm still waiting for my Oblivion HD rerelease with 2000% more content and solid gold collector's tin and genuine iron longsword (Ok, maybe not that spectacular, but I definately want a remake of oblivion with more content.). But, we'll have to wait for that.

 

[xshadowscreamx]

im waiting for arkhem city GOTY, oh wait , is it out now?

 

[krazykidd]

Wait , there are gamers who still haven't played skyrim?

Shame on you . I hereby revoke all your gamer badges ...

 

[Baralak]

Yeah! I've always wanted a new frisbee!
Sarcasm aside, no. Skyrim will never live up to any of the previous elder scrolls games.
To be honest, I'm still waiting for my Oblivion HD rerelease with 2000% more content and solid gold collector's tin and genuine iron longsword (Ok, maybe not that spectacular, but I definately want a remake of oblivion with more content.). But, we'll have to wait for that.

Do you have both Morrowind and Oblivion on PC? If so, go to morroblivion.com. It basically puts everything from Morrowind, everything, into Oblivion's game engine, and you can even set it up so you can just walk from Cyrodiil to Morrowind with one character, or vice versa.

 

[Random Argument Man]

I'm waiting until I have enough money to buy my own PS3...and then Assassins Creed 3...and then Skyrim.

P.S: I'm a major AC fan so I'm just going to plug my ear and scream LALALALALALALALALALA.

 

[lithiumvocals]

EDIT: nvm old post

 

[viranimus]

So the first Back to the Future movie wasn't complete because the sequels continued the base narrative? I could understand this being an issue if the base narrative was left incomplete, as in loose strings that haven't been tied up. But merely continuing the story is possible without the original story being left incomplete.

Here is the crux. You have to determine, if any element of the DLC becomes Canon. If anything becomes canon, then someone playing the stand alone base game is missing part of the story/backstory/lore.

So expansion packs are out of the question too, then? Look, I don't like DLC in many forms, but Skyrim was a pretty big and pretty complete game to start with. I didn't feel shorted, and I certainly don't feel entitled to get any expansions or mini-sequels for free. I think there is a battle to be fought as far as what should and shouldn't be DLC, but I think you've chosen the wrong game to pick a fight with. If you don't think there was enough to Skyrim to call it a complete game, then you must be playing a totally different game from everybody else. And if you feel like any extra content they make for the game, including extra storylines, which they worked on after the completion of the game should be given to you for free, then you must be very conceited.

Again, I bring up Back to the Future as an example. I paid for all three of my BTTF movies on DVD separately. They were made separately, and they were sold separately. There were big box sets available, but it was cheaper for me to pay for them separately. Would it be fair of me to go to Universal and say I deserve BTTF 2 and 3 because I paid for 1, and those films continue the storyline? No. Because again, they were made separately. And even though they continue the storyline, I am not entitled to them because they were made on their own time and budget.

If your logic is "If it continues the storyline, then it should be included the original game," then you don't have a beef with just DLC. You have a beef with every sequel in every continuous franchise that's ever been made.

Uhm, no... because thats an apples and oranges comparison. Your comparing direct sequels that have their own stand alone existing narrative. They may call back to prior narrative but they are their own entity. Using a comparison like back to the future, would be like a film studio making an extra 15 min worth of film inter spaced in one specific film that they charge you 1/4th the total ticket price for that you simply cannot watch without the base film.

With a company like Bethesda to which you know without a shadow of a doubt they WILL be adding DLC to their product and it WILL be narrative based on the main games story line it is simply illogical to buy before the DLC is released because its narrative end WILL be linked to the main game one way or another and it will in essence be buying the same thing twice, but at a higher rate.

This is not an issue we get to make the ridiculous claim of gamer entitlement. It has nothing to do with entitlement because no one said they expected to get that content for free. However Bethesda has made it a consistent track history of in essence giving that content away for free by rebundling their products with the DLC as GOTY/Ultimate editions once they feel they have milked all they can out of the content they have offered. So to purchase something when you know you will hypothetically get it for free in the sense you waited a year and a half from release and are paying full price for the base game and the DLC is pretty illogical seeings as by the time it does come out, the base game is being sold for like 1/4th what the full package is.