I thoroughly enjoyed Dragon Age 2, and have played both Legacy and Mark of the Assassin. Is BioWare planning on releasing any other playable DLC for DA2? I know Origins had tons, and I would really like to see Hawke's story continue a bit longer... 76.203.211.84 (talk) 23:31, January 25, 2012 (UTC) It took a pretty long while for some of the other DLC for Origins to come out. We might get some more soon.
The way I see it, with TOR being big, and Mass Effect 3 coming out in March, DAII might be done for now. Bioware must have its hands full! So just don't expect one, and if they do announce a DLC, be pleasantly surprised!
Daenerys Hawke (talk) 00:36, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
Between the Dragon Age facebook page posting "Happy year of the dragon. We're excited for what's in store ;)" those winky faces can ONLY mean new stuff, right? And Mike Laidlaw's assorted DA related tweets are usually tease worthy about upcoming content without really saying anything specific, whether that is a DA2 related content or a DA3 announcement is anyone's guess. Tommyspa (talk) 00:52, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
The way I see it, with TOR being big, and Mass Effect 3 coming out in March, DAII might be done for now. Bioware must have its hands full! So just don't expect one, and if they do announce a DLC, be pleasantly surprised!
You're forgetting that Dragon Age is managed by a completely different studio than Mass Effect and TOR. Why would they be busy with games that aren't theirs? Rathian Warrior (talk) 01:48, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
- Pretty sure that Mass Effect and Dragon Age are managed by the one in Edmonton. Xelestial (talk) 15:36, January 30, 2012 (UTC)
- Doesn't mean they can't get temporarily pulled on to other projects, the programmers in particular. I imagine it is MAJOR crunch time for ME3 and the launch of an MMO is a MASSIVE (no pun intended) undertaking. I don't think its entirely out of the question to think that all available hands are on deck to making sure both TOR and ME3 get out the door. Wsowen02 (talk) 02:02, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
:Doesn't mean they can't get temporarily pulled on to other projects, the programmers in particular. I imagine it is MAJOR crunch time for ME3 and the launch of an MMO is a MASSIVE (no pun intended) undertaking. I don't think its entirely out of the question to think that all available hands are on deck to making sure both TOR and ME3 get out the door.
That's not how the gaming industry works. People hired for a project work only on that project, and on nothing else. Pulling them from one studio to work in another is like saying GE would pull an engineer from working on plane engines and saying their new job is fabricating light bulbs. Rathian Warrior (talk) 02:17, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
- That is not entirely true, at least in the case of the writers. Lukas Kristjanson has written character dialogue for Mass effect 2 and Dragon age 2. Balitant (talk) 04:35, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
- Sledgehammer Games was supposed to ship a Call of Duty game this year. Instead they got sucked into helping make MW3. Have you seen the opening to AC Revelations? Six or seven different studios worked on that game, some of them used to make Tom Clancy games. SCE does it all the time. Check the credits of any Sony published game and you will almost always see names from Naughty Dog and Insomniac listed. Wsowen02 (talk) 04:52, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
There's a difference between what you're talking about and what Bioware/EA's situation currently is. First and foremost, you're basically accusing EA of having bad business sense if you're saying they have to move people from one studio to another, as if they don't have the sense to plan ahead for both Mass Effect and TOR. Second, what you're talking about is consulting, which is fairly common in the gaming industry, and would certainly be featured in the credits. EA isn't stupid enough to discontinue DA2 just to work on ME3. The games are too different to simply swap people in and out, an EA definitely doesn't have the fiscal constraints that would necessitate doing so. They would hire new help long before merging studios. Rathian Warrior (talk) 05:37, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
Rathian is right about moving people, though that has happened before, it's pretty rare. And Bioware is divided into separate studios, each working their own projects. What you guys are missing is the most important factor. MONEY. EA, of which Bioware is now fully part of, contrary to popular belief, is not a cash cow. Their stock is awful, their cash flow not unlimited, despite their net worth being very large for a gaming company. And to be blunt, Bioware/EA already have a huge financial risk afloat in SW:TOR. It sold well for a little while, but has really slowed down drastically of late. Seeing as how initial sales, for an MMO, are intended to make the money back you spent to make the game, with subscription fees making profit, and add ons etc possible, the slower sales mean they are heavily behind schedule and pretty much deep in debt right now. Now a successful run for the game will mean they will make some money, but the Warcraft killer model, sell huge, keep a significant portion paying monthly, did not really work here. The game sold well, and is still selling, but not anywhere near the level they expected which means they have to take the long route to make their money. Given the costs, which are historically immense, that puts any business into a caution mode. Which means any "risky" ventures are likely to be stopped or held. Sadly, DA2 did not sell as well as planned, and the DLC has done even worse most likely, which is not unusual really. So it probably all boils down to EA/BW not wishing to spend anymore money at present. And especially any money on a game that not a lot of people are still playing. Now, for story purposes, and because DA3 is already moving, I expect something else, if for no other reason than to tie up loose ends and set the stage, but what that something else is? I have no idea. The Grey Unknown (talk) 12:43, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
- I suspect the "something else" suggested by The Grey Unknown might be considerably more licensing of the Dragon Age intellectual property / brand identity to third parties to produce other creative products. I think we're going to see a lot more anime, comics, novels, merch, possibly a new Paper RPG or table-top gaming tie-in. Presumably those things make great sense commercially for EA: no need to risk capital in developing the product, and then take a healthy cut / commission on whatever profit the third party makes? The longer-term risk is of course that you risk diluting or damaging the prestige of the brand. --NickyStuu (talk) 12:49, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
How big is even the market for DA II dlc? Judging from the relatively low sales numbers of the game itself and the general discontent with the game, I would be surprised if the profits really were high enough where investing any manpower into that would be more profitable than focussing on ME 3, TOR, or even a possible DA 3 instead. Lemonaidz (talk) 13:14, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
EA/Bioware just assigns studios to their respective tasks. It's up to those studios to decide how to go about it and what the fans will buy. They're given a budget and they use it. The gaming industry isn't as flimsy and unstructured as you guys are making it out to be. Rathian Warrior (talk) 14:31, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
Still, if one project makes a lot more profit, it would only be wise to invest into the more profitable project. That's just how a company works. And there is no way there are some kind of bureacratical obstacles that stop them from investing less manpower or money in one project in favor of investing more manpower or money into the other project. Even if they can't just "swap" programmers, they still can dismiss unnecessary employees and hire new people. It's not like they're gonna make more DLC for DA II because they have too many programmers sitting around who have nothing better to do. Lemonaidz (talk) 15:03, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
No, that's really not how the gaming industry works at all. Budgets are generally ironclad, and are only reviewed and changed if they are violated. Projects are assigned said budgets, which are intended to be followed until said project runs its course. In the case of DA, as long as it continues to make profit I see no reason for EA/Bioware to come down on them for any reason, let alone to punish their modest success for the perceived failure of TOR or the expected out-of-the-park Mass Effect. I really don't know what you mean by useless employees, because companies don't hire useless employees. Every game-company employee is hired with a project in mind and is immediately assigned to said project and studio. EA doesn't have any "excess" employees they can throw from project to project, that would be a terrible business strategy. Rathian Warrior (talk) 17:13, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
How much profit are we even talking about in the case of DA II dlcs? As I said, the game itself had relatively low sales numbers and the general opinion on the game is discontent. Does anyone actually have some sales numbers on the dlcs? I just don't see why they would even plan to do more than a few dlcs after they've realized people stopped buying their game, which was a few weeks or so after the release of the game. So, would they really hire employees to program dlcs which would be released in nine months in the future? I don't think that's realistic, except it's some kind of big add-on for the game. Which would surprise me even further tbh. Even if they have started working nine months ago on some big project, I don't think they would just have blindly continued work on that project after the game's sales numbers flopped so horribly. It's not impossible to stop or throttle a game's development. I don't know why you're thinking a company is a static organism which is ignorant to any feedback from outside and which strictly execute their plans and projects like they're orders carved in stone. Lemonaidz (talk) 17:48, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
- If they really started working on some big project nine months ago (which, sadly, is highly unlikely), teasers would be out already. And they're not. Nevertheless, it's about time we get some dlc's.-Algol- (talk) 17:58, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
You're appallingly uninformed. Despite what you might think, DA2 has made quite the pretty penny for EA/Bioware, as has the DA franchise as a whole (book sales for Asunder are on par with those for The Calling and Stolen Throne, DA:L is one of the five most popular games on Facebook and I know of many people who purchase it) and it's estimated that a majority of people who purchased DA2 also purchased the corresponding DLC. In short: EA/Bioware is in no danger of dropping or downsizing the DA franchise. What's more, I don't know where you're getting the idea that EA/Bioware would need to hire anyone new at this point, let alone people to work on DA DLCs. Mass Effect is a month from completion, TOR is out and turning a profit, even if it is rather meager, and DA continues to pump out quality DLCs. Why would any of the above projects need new talent? I'm not at all sorry to inform you that your "the-future-is-dim" prediction of EA's industry is grossly overstated. EA isn't blindly continuing anything, they're pursuing profit. And right now, DA=profit. Rathian Warrior (talk) 19:30, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
Sorry I started this huge debate. I really thought that the fact that Bioware had other massive projects going on would influence the DA franchise. Daenerys Hawke (talk) 19:59, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
Why does nobody ever actually bother to look at the sales numbers? *Sigh* Guess it's up to me again to actually start bringing up facts instead of wild assumptions.
http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/?name=dragon+age+II&publisher=&console=&genre=&minSales=0.01&results=50
A measly 1.8 million copies. While they did actually make some money because the production of the game was much cheaper than that, focussing on releasing content that is only available to 1.8 million people instead of content that could have potential target groups that are much bigger than that is nonsensical. And I don't even know where you got the idea from that a "majority" of these would even purchase dlc for the game. Usually the amount of people who additionally buy dlc for a game is just a fraction of the owners of the game. Just for comparison, Awakening was sold only 0.6 million times, little more than a tenth of the people who had bought Origins. You may say Awakening isn't the best example for quality dlc, but it wasn't completely ruined by bad word-of-mouth or anything of that sort, either. What I'm saying is there was no reason why the sales for Awakening were that low, Origins was a brilliant game, so brilliant in fact that you would think there was a loyal fanbase that would willingly throw their money at Bioware just to have another opportunity to kill more Darkspawn and be the Grey Warden. So, a game like Dragon Age II which was completely destroyed by bad word-of-mouth is supposed to have lured in much more people into buying additional content? Unless you actually bring up some solid arguments for that or bring up some actual sales numbers instead of vague assumptions, I won't believe the sales numbers for DA II dlc were any higher than a tenth of the game's sales numbers.
I don't even understand why you're bringing up the books or the facebook spin-off. I'm not saying the franchise is dead or that Bioware should just stop working on the DA franchise and abandon it, that would be just self-destructive. I'm saying the complete contrary, they should instead focus on the next installment of the series. Actually do something for the future of the franchise instead of trying to milk as much money as possible from the burning wreck that DA II is. What I'm trying to say is, a company is dynamic. A product doesn't work quite as you planned, you have to adapt to that. Lemonaidz (talk) 20:42, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
According to word-of mouth over several threads on the Social Bioware forum (there are no sales figures for non-disc-based DLC that I am aware of) it seems that a majority, that is, more than half, of the people who own DA2 also bought the DLC. However, since this is the same type of information gathering that, as you yourself stated, led to people not purchasing the game, there isn't any way to quantitatively measure this data. I'm sorry I can't change your mind about how well the DLC in DA2 is selling, but that's not my problem. I know I'm correct, so I won't really worry about it. And I don't know why you brought in the sales figures for DA2 either. I know what they are, and I stand by my statement that they made quite a bit of money for EA/Bioware. As for your analogy about a company being dynamic, let me give you a simpler one. Companies pursue profit. And as I said before, DA is making money. And while I disagree with you about DA2 being a burning wreck, I won't argue that point. What I will argue is the fact that the DLCs are making enough money for EA/Bioware to be worth continuing the pursuit them. If this wasn't the case (and trust me, we would know whether or not it was the case) we wouldn't have seen a Legacy, which received a genuinely impressed response from the DA fanbase, or a MotA. As good as you might think you are about analyzing sales figures and profit levels, can promise you that EA/Bioware has people who are thousands of times better at it. And if they say that EA/Bioware is better served making more DA DLC, then that is what they will do.
Besides, it's highly likely that Edmonton is developing the next DA game in the series right now, at the same time as they're working on the DLCs. In fact I'd be rather surprised if they weren't. But once again, they're almost certainly going to release new DLC, and I highly doubt they'd do this if it was as stupid fiscally as you're saying it is. Rathian Warrior (talk) 21:10, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
There is no way to know anything unless you have actually counted every single person who has stated he has bought the dlcs. Saying you know that roughly a million people have bought a product simply because there is an internet forum with a somewhat solid user base is nothing but blind faith. Lemonaidz (talk) 21:48, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
You say that, and yet the numbers must be high enough for the experts at EA/Bioware to continue producing DLC. Rathian Warrior (talk) 22:31, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
I'm seeing a lot of claims but little evidence on this page. In any case I kinda want some DLC for DA2 but at the same time I'm perfectly fine if they just move on to DA3 and try to make it as good as possible. I assume DLC will come out depending on how well the previous ones were received/sold but who knows? DA2 has almost been out a year. MrRexfire (talk) 22:49, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
I think an expansion would help improve DA2. One of the biggest complaints I've heard about it is how short it is. I've heard that the level cap is 50 but most people can't even get over 30 because there's just not that much to do. An expansion with a bit more of an open area (more open than Kirkwall at least) and some interesting new companions. As is I think DA2 is about as long as DAA, which would make it roughly half/two thirds the length of DAO. (not counting DLC). Maybe we could find out what happened to Sigrun and Velanna. Possibly meet a Fex. Find something related to the griffons. Check out the underground prisons that held the archdemons. Find out what Flemeth is, etc.
As far as finances go, EA owns several developers and likely makes tens of billions of dollars a year. So no shortage of cash or employees. From what I could find (I admit I didn't look hard) DAO made about as much money as DA2 and got about the same rating. The main reason for that seems to be that DAO sold somewhat averagely at first and got more popular later. As time passed prices went down and sales went up. DA2 got alot of pre-order and early buys and less people interested when the prices dropped and since the DLC stopped.
It's comparable to SW: The Force Unleashed and TFU2. Except that TFU2 pretty much bombed, people were fired, DLC was scrapped and the game abandoned and forgotten. But it was similar problems. Better combat, better sound, better graphics, lack of a variety of environments, lack of importance, lack of a good story, and an over-reliance on the small annoying crap (challenges for example). I'm not sure but I don't think EA/Bioware has gone quite that far with DA2 at least not yet. They have admitted to mistakes but unfortunately sometimes mistakes are necessary for things to improve. I have not heard one positive word about MotA but it still got a web series and I wouldn't be surprised to see the elf girl assassin (qunari-tallis-athlok-tal-vashoth or whatever she's called) in DA3 unfortunately. I think at this point we'll hopefully get an expansion soon, then at E3 in a few months they'll announce DA3 and a 'final chapter' DLC for DA2. Then when they're just about to release DA3, we get the DA2UE and if we're lucky a DA3 demo.
--Vampire Damian (talk) 23:11, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
- That's what I'm looking forward to as well, an expansion if anything. My Hawke is lvl 23 I think, I guess I didn't do much lol, but still If the lvl cap is 50 then there should be A LOT more to do and an expansion can fix that. not to mention allow us to see new characters and a chance to leave that godawful city. MrRexfire (talk) 23:40, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
Take a look at: http://investor.ea.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=594196 (straight from the horse's mouth, as it were). As at July 2011, DA2 had sold over 2 million units. No mention of DLC sales in any subsequent financial release. --NickyStuu (talk) 23:18, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
- Sold IN means copies produced and shipped to retailers. Not actually sold. There is a difference. It's tricky word play to appease investors, like my dumb ass, who has 10 shares of EA stock that is worth 35% of what I paid for it about 5 years ago when they bought my fav studio Bioware. DLC sales are never released either guys, but they are always a much smaller portion of total sales. So if DA2 sold 1.7-1.8 million games, which is the best guess I have seen, then a DLC will sell about 20-30 percent of that. At most from what I have read. Fact is, most people move on after playing the game and play something else. But usually there are enough rabid fans left over to make a small profit if the game was good, which is a matter of strong opinion here for most. DLC is cheap to make anyway. It's usually left over parts of games that only require "fixing" or "tweaking". And yes, leaving that content out of initial release is intentional. Believe me, if I can sell you something for $60, and get you to buy six more DLC's for $10, I'm gonna do that over putting all that content in the original game....anyway....one other thing. EA is NOT flush with CASH. They are flush with ASSETS, and borrow off those assets, just like every other company. Huge difference, especially nowadays. Bioware's budget, which is set, as mentioned by one of you, but slightly flexible also, is also heavily tied up right now. One game's success or failure does in fact play a part in another. With a 200 million plus investment in TOR out, and with them NOT making up the majority of that through sales alone, you can bet your backside the cautious meter in EA HQ just went off. Now, ME3 could do away with that caution also. My guess is...ME3 will hit stores before we get another DLC. Or possibly even word of one. There won't be an expansion, those are pretty much dead as they sell awful normally. There will be a DA3 though. Regardless, don't worry about it and be patient. Or disappear for months at a time like me. Believe me, it's better not to think on it much. The Grey Unknown (talk) 01:56, January 27, 2012 (UTC)
I don't know about any of these sales figures or anything, but I am hoping for more DA2 DLC. My only wish is that we can forego the Cassandra/Varric Interrogation narrative framing. I don't want it to be playable from any point in the game, I want something that comes after the DA2's ending. I remember thinking after I beat the game for the first time, "Damn, I'd really like to see the fallout from this shitstorm." But no, just a few glib words from Varric. These side-story DLC's, even as good as Legacy was, are not cutting it for me.--Liam Sionnach (talk) 01:32, January 27, 2012 (UTC)
Agree with the need of the expansion. It can really fix some of the problems we're having with DA2, as BioWare knows it recieved, let's say, 'mixed' response. Some ideas:
- Setting: Starkhaven and its' vacuum of power.
- Alternative setting: Qunari try to have revenge on Hawke, who killed one-third of their ruling elite.
- Ability to choose a third specialization and new specializations. My 'canon' Hawke is level 30, she has nowhere to grow right now:(
- The development of mage-templar war.
- New character quests. Merrill was unjustly left out in MotA, I demand equity.
- A chance of developing the romance.
- A chance to deal with at lest some of loose ends after DA2. (I'm sure every Hawke of yours has a personal death list)
- Ah yes, and no more overpowered items please, we have enough.
Sounds good?-Algol- (talk) 06:03, January 27, 2012 (UTC)
1. I am almost positive there will be more DLC as they pretty much promised that they weren't done with Hawke and it appears they want to bridge the gap between DA2 and DA3.
2. But some people are right, they would be pretty silly to release it at the same time as TOR and ME3. I think the same studio that works on ME3 is the same one as Dragon Age, although their teams are separate, but I do imagine there are some crossovers. The TOR studio is here in the US in Austin so I doubt there is any overlapping there, but it would be foolish to release too much at the same time. My own guess is that we'll see more DLC around late spring (April, May) and early summer (May, June) at the latest. Xelestial (talk) 15:36, January 30, 2012 (UTC)
- What concerns me the most, is that they're not making any announcements at all. Not even "there are going to be more dlc's, just wait". Now the attention to the franchise is maintained with the novel, comic and anime, but not the actual game. This can't be good.-Algol- (talk) 18:20, January 30, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not too familiar with how DLC is announced, but it seems pointless to just say there's going to be more DLC without actually announcing THE DLC. Everyone there claims they can only say "they're working on something" due to legal issues, though I'm not sure why... Xelestial (talk) 18:26, January 30, 2012 (UTC)
How does a small crossover with ME sound as a DLC. It would center on a mysterious temple that turns out to be a dormant reaper and Hawke would have to fight through indoctrinate people, darkspawn, and husks (doesn't anyone want to see what a darkspawn/husk hybrid would look like). It all ends with the reaper being destroyed after relaying a warning that unsettles and confuses Hawke. The only ME characters would be the reaper and the husk enemies. How does that sound.--98.148.251.165 (talk) 01:15, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
- Wrong thread friend. Try this one : [1]
- ----Isolationistmagi 01:35, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
Even if more DLC for DA:2 is released, I think the interest won't be high. It's been more than 10 months since DA:2's release. Recall that all of Origins' DLC's, including the expansion, were released within 7-8 months of the main game. Personally, I'd prefer that they focus their energies on DA:3. Whocares65 (talk) 02:18, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
Lets do some simple research, shall we? Test subjects: Dragon Age Origins, Mass Effect 2, Fallout 3, Fallout:New Vegas, criteria - AAA games, critical and commercial success, published by companies fond of the DLC thing. Stuffpacks not taken into account.
Fallout 3. Launch date - October 2008. 1st DLC "Öperation:Anchorage", January 2009. 2nd, "The Pitt", March 2009. 3rd, "Broken Steel", May 2009. 4th, "Point Lookout", June 2009. 5th and last, "Mothership Zeta", August 2009. Apparent schedule. Two months left to game's first year anniversary.
Dragon Age: Origins. Launch date - November 2009. Two DLCs made of content cut from base game are published the same month, although "Stone Prisoner" is partially free. "Return to Ostagar", possibly made of content cut from base game - January 2010. The full-on expansion, "Awakenings", March 2010. "The Darkspawn Chronicles", May. "Leliana's Song", July. "The Golems of Amgarrak", August. "Witch Hunt", September. Two months left to game's first year anniversary.
Mass Effect 2. Launch date - January 2010. "Zero day" DLC - "Zaeed - The Price of Revenge", launches with the base game. Second "zero" DLC, content cut from base game "Normandy Crash Site", January 2010. 1st DLC, "Kasumi - Stolen Memory", April 2010. 2nd DLC, "Overlord", June 2010. 3rd DLC, September 2010. 4th and last, "Arrival", March 2011. Two months after game's first year anniversary.
Fallout: New Vegas. Launch date - October 2010. 1st DLC, "Dead Money", December 2010. 2nd DLC "Honest Hearts" May 2011, 3rd DLC "Old World Blues" July 2011, 4th and last "Lonesome Road", September 2011. Apparent schedule. A month left to game's first year anniversary.
Now, Dragon Age 2. March 2011, two zero day DLCs. 1st DLC "Legacy", July 2011. 2nd DLC "Mark of the Assassin", October 2011.
The larger periods of time between DA2 stuff are apparent, and there's radio silence since Assassin. I think it's safe to presume game's performance hasn't quite met the expectations, so there's no point in making DLCs of underperforming game. However, something like ME2's Ärrival - a tie between episodes 2 and 3 - is likely and probably will be tied to announcement of DA3, because it makes more sense to promote the future title. Dorquemada (talk) 11:05, January 31, 2012 (UTC)