Talk:Alternate Appearance Packs

Finally, Garrus gets that armor fixed. Jack's... thing... on the eyes is stupid though Prismvg 20:17, March 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup. Ditto for Thane's. SpartHawg948 20:18, March 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the sunglasses kills it for Thane and Jack. Garrus' is awesome though, definitely using that one.


 * No kidding, but Garrus' is the best of the lot. The other's not so much. IF the sunglasses went then it would be better. Lancer1289 20:30, March 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * To quote a friend of mine, "Now Thane and Jack can run around acting out CSI:Citadel". Bakageta-Koto 01:03, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

The only reason I'm going to get this is for Garrus's outfit, I'm never, ever going to touch the other two outfits. Tehori 16:23, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

Do we even need a separate page for this? I mean, this could be merged under Mass Effect 2 under a DLC section or something. On a side note, the outfits looks very sleek, except for the sunglasses; Jack's visor looks like a duct tape over her eyes! Teugene 21:21, March 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * I thought Jack's visor was a censor bar at first. I think duct tape is the better descriptor, though. As for DLC, I think it might be a good idea to have a Mass Effect 2 DLC page, which contains summaries of all DLC (categorized as 'Paid' and 'Cerberus Network', with links to more detailed DLC pages as they are made. That way, we have a centralized 'hub' for information on what could be many, many different pieces of DLC by the end of the game's life cycle. UERD 00:50, March 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd put that recommendation under the actual DLC category discussion page if I were you, noones going to read it here. SuicidalSkydiver (talk) 00:53, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

Good point. We've got one in progress here, by the way, for posterity's sake. UERD 01:45, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I have to say that Garrus's armor looks a bit cooler in the dark, all shiny and lit up :P. Prismvg 20:23, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

Part 1?
There was an official statement saying that this is part one of a series? If there hasn't been, then the references to it being "Part 1" should be taken down. Bakageta-Koto 17:30, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

Stupid me, it says it right on the download page on Bioware. My apologies. Bakageta-Koto 17:32, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

Oh come on!
We have to PAY for alternate apperances now?

While I am very grateful for the free DLC we have gotten, it just doesn't make sense to me that we get a new character, a new planet / mission and (soon) a vehicle and 5 extra missions for free, but we have to pay for this???

Sigh, and yet I will have to buy it, if not so Garrus armor is no longer battered and broken. SuicidalSkydiver (talk) 21:23, March 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * There is only so much they can and will make free. They have to pay the programmers to make it after all. Stop whining.Bastian964 22:07, March 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've already said I'm grateful for all the free content we've gotten, it's rare for a company to give so much free content (the only other company that does it better is Valve, especially when it comes to TF2). I'm just annoyed that of all the things they could make us pay for, it's alternate appearance. I would be more than happy to pay for Zaeed, the Firewalker pack and Kasumi, if it meant we didn't have to pay for stupidly small things like new costumes.


 * This is the usual MO for EA, though. They often release simple reskins and sell them for 160 or even 240 MSP (see Dead Space). I would bet money that these appearance packs are not even made by Bioware, but some people at EA who work on packs like this using the dev tools to extort money from people who will buy anything released for their favorite game. They won't stop doing this either unless people like SuicidalSkydiver stop purchasing these things. Vote with your wallet by buying content that actually expands the game in an enjoyable and useful manner. &mdash;ArmeniusLOD 18:04, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why pay for they putt painted papper in Jack i like her clothing and that but please gray paper in the eyes?
 * Also i even like those sun glasses but think with me; an assassin with with glasses?
 * What as it from badass?
 * That would explain the apparent, annoying sketchiness of the glasses of Jack and Thane. Swordser Buddy, 21:18, April 1, 2010
 * I encountered some kind of bug that ripped me off. When I looked at this on the Cerberus Network, it was listed as "This Transaction: Free". I thought that odd, since the xbl marketplace listed it as 160, but I got it anyway, because, what the hell, it's listed as free. It then deducted the 160 points from my account. I had just enough for the upcomming Shadow Broker DLC, but a fucking typo ruined it. I'm super-pissed, and will think twice before buying anything from this company again. I should have just pirated everything. It's the only way to avoid being ripped off. 76.116.36.193 15:20, August 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * I encountered some kind of bug that ripped me off. When I looked at this on the Cerberus Network, it was listed as "This Transaction: Free". I thought that odd, since the xbl marketplace listed it as 160, but I got it anyway, because, what the hell, it's listed as free. It then deducted the 160 points from my account. I had just enough for the upcomming Shadow Broker DLC, but a fucking typo ruined it. I'm super-pissed, and will think twice before buying anything from this company again. I should have just pirated everything. It's the only way to avoid being ripped off. 76.116.36.193 15:20, August 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * I encountered some kind of bug that ripped me off. When I looked at this on the Cerberus Network, it was listed as "This Transaction: Free". I thought that odd, since the xbl marketplace listed it as 160, but I got it anyway, because, what the hell, it's listed as free. It then deducted the 160 points from my account. I had just enough for the upcomming Shadow Broker DLC, but a fucking typo ruined it. I'm super-pissed, and will think twice before buying anything from this company again. I should have just pirated everything. It's the only way to avoid being ripped off. 76.116.36.193 15:20, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

Some people forget
that other people need to eat, someone is actualyl making this crap and they are not doing it for charity purposes, personally i am honored to pay forany crap that bioware makes, i will pay for it wil a smile on my face, because they have almost always dilivered with games, esceeding my expectations beyond rational thought. ralok 05:08, March 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem here is that at this pricing scheme (scam would be more appropriate) we could end up with around 12 hours of DLC content for $64. I for one am not honored to pay any company that much for that little. Thats roughly 1/3rd of the full game for more than the game itself originally cost. I don't believe that it's costing anywhere near 3 times as much as the full game for them to develop these little DLC's. I find it disheartening that so many people seem willing, much less honored, to pay this much. The full game was worth the price, and I would have bought it (after the price dropped cuz I'm poor) if it hadn't been given to me, but the rest is TPB for me. I've read that EA hasn't been doing so well financially, and I hope that pricing scams like this make things worse for them. Does anyone else remember the NWN premium modules by Bioware? Those were totally reasonable, 8 hours for $8, 10 hours for $10. Me thinks EA is directly responsible for this price gouging because Bioware was not know for that kind of behavior prior to being assimilated by the Empire.--Karstedt 22:52, March 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Many games are about 10 hours long with a 60$ price tag. So, its hardly a scam.Bastian964 23:12, March 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * And they don't typically sell as well as ME either... because they are a scam. There are very very few games in the 10 hour range that are successful at $60. They usually get picked up in the bargain bin when they don't sell for closer to $20. Just because others exist, does not make it less of a scam. There are hundreds of pyramid scams out there. Their abundance does not make them legitimate.--Karstedt 23:21, March 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well you realize that BioWare has over 500 or near there of employees that they have to cover. BioWare is one of the few, in my opinion, video game companies that still produces great games. Also I've seen packs on Xbox Live that give less than this and charge the same price, or are even more. So I'd hardly call it a scam and you seem to have played some of those games judging by your comments. If a company was to make DLC at your prices then they would be quickly out of business, even ones as large as BioWare, EA, and Activision to name a few. For $10 you got two packs for ME and both added about three to five hours, depending on your playstyle, of content. That is reasonable considering Rock Band and Guitar Hero charge the same price for one song. If you don't like it then don't buy it and stop complaning already. Lancer1289 00:21, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Regardless of employee numbers, it still doesn't cost more to produce 1.5 hours of content... if anything it should cost less. Are you suggesting that the larger a company is, the more we should pay them, just because they have more people? So I guess we should pay a lot more for a Ford than a Ferrari, because Ford is so much bigger. Again, the point that other rip-off DLC exists is not evidance that this is any less of a rip-off. And yes, I have played some of those games that were a rip-off... except I got them for $20 or less, so they weren't a rip-off for me. Additionally, a company has proven that it can make DLC at my prices... Bioware itself in fact, has proven that with NWN. And comparing the prices of this DLC with the even more outrageous Guitar Hero and Rock Band, doesn't make this DLC any rosier. I don't like the price, I won't buy it, and I won't stop complaining without a good reason. For instance, if ME3 completely sucks, I won't complain if they release overpriced DLC for it. No amount of, "quit whining", and, "it's fair because many other things are unfair too", will stop me.--Karstedt 01:19, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you actually have any computer programming experience? Do you know how long it can take to just make a simple program, even if you know what your are doing. It can take days or even weeks just to make a simple costume for a game. I will say that I have no where near the experience of most game programmers but I know about computer programming. To make a pack that integrates seemlessly into a game, it takes a lot of work and time. I won't go into details but to make something that causes the game not to crash and to make it integrate seemlessly take a lot of effort. To see an example of this go to the Dragon Age Wiki and see what happened with the Ostagar DLC pack for a great expample if you rush something and don't take the time to do it right. Lancer1289 01:26, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Is that a rhetorical question or are you trying to imply that it does indeed take 3-4 times as much work to create DLC than it did for the game itself? No, I'm not a programmer. I know serveral... and one of them is actually good. If you are implying the outfit DLC require actually coding, then I call bunk. I'm pretty sure the Unreal engine can handle a few extra models and skins without a code rewrite. And unless they are implementing some pretty major new gameplay elements for the Kasumi mission, I doubt that requires much, if anything, in the way of code either. These are glorified mods. And if they would just release a friggin tool to pack/unpack pcc files, there would be lots of them out there already, minus the VA and CG cinematics. I've worked on and tested mods like these before. They do not require anywhere near 3 times the work as the original game, and I would feel pretty safe saying they don't requires anywhere near 1/3rd of the time as the original full game. Yet I'm still willing pay the same rate as I would for the full game, maybe even a little more... but nowhere near 3-4 times as much.--Karstedt 02:38, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * You have good points Karstedt, dlc's in my opinions shouldn't net a profit - they should reduce the cost of the next game by having a few devs that are not overloaded and have spare time work on a few mods they can then sell to the previous game. They could also test new gaming elements in those dlc's so that they can polish them for the sequel. Dlc's alone won't help fund a company as large as Bioware, and if anyone thinks it can their logic is flawed. It's just phase 1,5 between ME1 and 2, get a few extra bucks while brainstorming on the sequel(don't have any work to do till you know what to do). Also don't forget they are releasing a silly dlc that adds skins for cash, but they released essential missions (Zaeed,Firewalker) for free. That makes a good name for BioWare, as a casual player can play the missions for no additional price and the more than average player can buy all the paid skins and other stuff to his hearts desires. But I'm still waiting for the pricing of the Thief dlc, if they go more than 5 bucks they went overboard(hell even 5 is too much imho, but who am I to judge).--SkyHiRider 06:14, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not to seem aggressively combative, as I'm glad there are others willing to speak up about their disappointment... but I actually disagree that DLC's shouldn't net a profit :). They should be profitable, but not 3-4 times as profitable as the original game; by gameplay to cost ratio from the consumer perspective, but probably closer to 10x or more in terms of company profit as they are simply adding contenet to an existing platform in the vast majority of cases. But I don't have access to development cost analysis records to make a stink about insisting they are 10x more profitable at that prices they are trying to gouge people for. And the pricing for Kasumi is rumored to be $8 with 1.5 hours of playtime. And if it is, I guess we are two people who won't be buying it. But I hope you continue to complain and state your specific reasons why even in the face of unsubstantiated arguments of fairness, useless/irritating jeers from those that think everything is perfect, and the wealthy people that think money grows on trees (there seem to be a lot of them online that consider $10 to be something they wouldn't bother picking up if it fell from their pocket... where are they in real life?). I know I will.--Karstedt 12:52, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * True, DlC's should net a profit (why else do it: ) ) But I'm sure DLC's alone can't sustain a company like Bioware with 500 people for long. They just fill the empty space between ME2 and 3 development, a small flavored filler that helps pay the bills a bit before the next big thing. But it's interesting to read an opinion that actually states some facts and tries to make sense too.--SkyHiRider 16:45, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

"Neuromancer"
What's with the part about Jack resembling Molly from Neuromancer? I don't see the connection at all... 81.235.171.21 16:20, April 2, 2010 (UTC)

Me neither, seeing as Jack doesn't have hair... or individual mirrored lenses surgically grafted onto her eye sockets. But i'd be lying if I said I didn't see "some" resemblance in the clothing.

The resemblance is nonsense. Molly's lenses were embedded in her face, which is a far cry from what Jack is wearing. Just because Jack is a nasty piece of work and wears shiny sunglasses doesn't mean she looks like Molly. Almost *any* mercenary chick in a videogame could be said to look like Molly by that standard. Nothing in her outfit hints at Molly in any way, either. -- Dagmar d&#39;Surreal 04:49, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmm.. I personally have no idea what this Neuromancer thing is to begin with, but there have been three comments that the supposed link is bupkiss, and no comments that it's valid. Seems pretty telling to me... SpartHawg948 05:07, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Meh
Okay, I have to put this out there. Why would they bother adding sunglasses to Jack? Why would they hide those beautiful eyes with such a stupid looking visor? Hell, Thane's sunglasses look cooler. At least they look like sunglasses. Jack's just look like a grey censor bar from a certain angel. Without them, she'd look really awesome. As for Garrus, I'm glad they finally got rid of those scars on his armor but he still has the facial scars. Needless to say, I am still downloading this for Garrus. Everyone else, if you are that concerned about paying for it then I suggest you wait about 5 months. Whenever someone releases downloadable content, it's only a matter of time before they decide to lower the price. If you don't believe me, then you've obviously never played Halo 3. They lower their prices more than Wal-Mart lol

Expectations
Pack 2 confirmations. Only two teammates are confirmed, the third is yet to be completed. Grunt and Legion are approved, armors are in the work: Legion - repaired armor, additional plating Grunt - clan urdnot armor Third member unknown. Possible outcomes are Mordin or Tali. Armors mentioned above have yet to be approved, but are likely to be final outcomes.--XboxAnnihilator 00:10, September 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Fine and dandy, but you got a source? Is this off the BioWare social forums? -- Commdor (Talk) 00:13, September 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Forums state that Legion and Grunt are the highest spoken character suggestions. As for their uniforms, they have yet to be confirmed. As for my confirmation source, I have a friend who's friend's wife's husband works at BioWare. I couldn't pass off the opportunity to talk to him. He spoke little of the DLC but did mention that Grunt and Legion are confirmed candidates, but are still in the work.--XboxAnnihilator 00:18, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, I forgot to mention that my hometown is in Edmonton, home to BioWare's headquarters. That explains how I was able to talk to him in person.--XboxAnnihilator 00:19, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately that isn't enough for us here. We need some actual sources, i.e. something we can see like from BioWare's site, or some other reliable one. A friend of a friend just isn't enough in this case, or at least not enough to put into the article proper. Lancer1289 00:22, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course. I never said I was going to add this information to the article. I was merely confirming the possibilities of its content. Nothing more and nothing less.--XboxAnnihilator 00:24, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well that's good. However it was also for the future. Sometimes people come across things like this on talk pages and post them into the main article as "this is what is coming" or something like that. However I would like to see Legion patched up, but I also really want some armor for Miranda. Grunt, not my first choice, but I can live with that. Lancer1289 00:27, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I hear you on Grunt. Least I would have expected. As for Miranda, there's always that third possition we're missing.--XboxAnnihilator 00:31, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I am SO confused. You said your source was that "I have a friend who's friend's wife's husband works at BioWare". Now, let's look at that again, with emphasis on the confusing part... "I have a friend who's friend's wife's husband works at BioWare". Now, unless I'm mistaken, Canada does not permit bigamy. So, unless your friend's wife's husband is your friend, how can your friend have a wife who has a husband? SpartHawg948 01:03, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Disregard the use of the word "wife" in my previous sentance. Correct format is "My friend's friend's husband" instead of the former.--XboxAnnihilator 18:35, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

I can live without a new outfit for Grunt, I don't see the point. Tali and Legion are good options. Miranda really needs some proper clothes (maybe something like Jill in RE5 :D) --Prismvg 18:44, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I am pleased that Grunt was chosen but I don't understand why no one else agrees. Can someone give me a reason why Grunt should not be included.--174.3.9.125 22:43, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know. Maybe he's not as widely popular as the others. Personally, I think he should have that armor that is worn by Chief Weyrloc Guld and all the other heavy krogan in the game.--XboxAnnihilator 23:04, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

Grunt definitely needs a bigger armor like the Battlemaster Armor or a armor like the one Garm wears. Legion is more "cult" looking with that hole in his chest and Miranda needs less clothes ;) SoulRipper 22:47, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * You're a pig.--XboxAnnihilator 23:04, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I really hope that your last comment was a poorly executed joke. Because if it wasn't, it's a pretty clear violation of site policy against insulting other users, which is a bannable offense. SpartHawg948 23:09, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I am a pig? Really? Why you (XboxAnnihilator) called me that, because I joked? SoulRipper 23:32, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'd also very much like to have that question answered. SpartHawg948 23:33, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd like an answer as well. Lancer1289 23:34, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Calm down, guys. It was a joke. I apologize if I offended anyone.--XboxAnnihilator 23:35, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * You really need to do something next time to give an indication that it's a joke, as just typing "You're a pig." in no way indicates that it's meant to be taken as a joke and not an insult. SpartHawg948 23:39, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Be senseable. Why would anyone want to violate standards unless their intentions were to get banned. It was, in all honesty, obvious that I was joking. I am not a bad person, Spart. Neither are you.--XboxAnnihilator 23:41, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

What just happened?--174.3.9.125 23:45, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) People would violate standards out of ignorance, or because they simply don't care. I had no way of knowing whether or not you even knew about the rule. I'm not omniscient, after all. As for why people do it, ask the guy who just said "F*** you" to several editors in the blogs. It was, after all, not at all obvious you were joking, as absolutely nothing was used to indicate this. It said literally "You're a pig." How else do you interpret this but at face value? It didn't say "You're a pig. :P" or "You're a pig. ;)" or "You're a pig. Just kidding." Or anything to indicate jest. When nothing is used to signal intent, the only reasonable way to take it is at face value, as again, not being omniscient, I have no way whatsoever of knowing which editors are and aren't aware of site rules and policy, nor have you been editing here enough for me to have a good idea of what kind of person you are. SpartHawg948 23:46, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * It was of my understanding that I had included a "lol" into my comment. Apologies again. My keyboard sucks.--XboxAnnihilator 23:49, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * And if you had done so, this would not have been an issue. You now see, I hope, why it was not at all obvious that you were joking, and why this was taken so seriously? SpartHawg948 23:50, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

Next time put a face like :P or something like that. I didnt asked to start a war here, just wanted to know the reason. No hard feelings.SoulRipper 23:53, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * None taken. But I hope I didn't offend you. It is quite a nuisance when a minor topic stretches so far because of a misunderstanding. So few members of this site have higher tolerance. No offense.--XboxAnnihilator 23:56, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

Yup. I do pride myself on having little or no tolerance of violations of rules, though I do always go out of my way (even when the violations are deliberate and egregious) to inform people of the rules and give them a chance to reform, recant, whatever, as opposed to just banning people right away with no warning the first time, which I do think is mighty tolerant. SpartHawg948 23:59, September 11, 2010 (UTC)