DLC..... This shit has to stop

[Panzer_God]

Now, having said that, DJ Hero is totally an expansion of Pac Man.

Dark room, repetitive music, hitting round objects in quick succession?

Yeah, DJ Hero? More like Pac Man Hero.

Or a strip club. PoleDance Hero anyone?

 

[AlphaOmega]

Examples of Good DLC:
The Ballad of Gay Tony/ Lost and Dammed
Broken Steel, Point Lookout
Option Skins (like killing floor, doesnt influence gameplay for anybody but you if you want it too)
Examples of Bad DLC:
Operation Anchorage
Map Packs for PC games (I can understand it on the console, PC games and dedicated servers make it obsolete)

Main problem with DLC is that some is half assed, most is overpriced, and most doesnt coem to the PC.

 

[Abedeus]

Map Packs for PC games (I can understand it on the console, PC games and dedicated servers make it obsolete)

Okay, can we stop that already?

User maps and professionally crafted maps are not the same thing. I mean, sometimes they are, sometimes a good modder makes good maps, and then he typically becomes a game designer and stops putting his pro-level talent out there for free.

I actually played the TF2 console version and stopped playing when Valve started focusing on the PC version only (which I also own). I had two reasons for this:

1) slower pace in the consoles plays up tactics instead of twitch shooting, so if an engineer set up a turret it required teamwork to override it, rather than any of the dozen techniques to destroy turrets with chip damage PC players use.

2) I hate, hate, HATE user maps. Whenever I joined a server I had to endure the endless stream of crappy user maps from people who thought a huge open space between the two spawn points or a single tiny corridor or whatever, was fun to play. I actually like having few, professionally made, well balanced maps on competitive multiplayer games.

You do know that console version is still unbalanced because of all the changes that happened only on the PC?

Also, there are filters for official maps.

But L4D2 SHOULD have been an update/expansion. There were not any MAJOR graphical improvements and there were new models introduced. Big deal. I personally did not buy it because I could not justify spending 40 bucks on a game I practically already had. With better main characters, too.

If there is a game worth boycotting, its MW2. L4D2 is simply so much better than the first one, and now with the mods for the original characters and maps, there is no excuse not to buy it.

Yes, there is no argument against boycotting the PC version of MW2, however it IS a legitimate sequel. L4D2 feels like less of a legitimate sequel because the storyline is ill-defined in the L4D series, and because there seems to be no relatedness to the original game. Perhaps the new DLC will tie everything together for a giant clusterfuck finale in L4D3.

...There are few arguments.

1. More expensive than other games ($60 or 60 EUR at Steam - come on...).
2. Again, very short single-player campaign.
3. Horrible multiplayer compared to anything since Neverwinter Nights with dedicated servers up to 128 players.
4. You need Steam, even if you didn't buy it from Steam.
5. Multiplayer hasn't evolved much... I mean, even Quake Wars wasn't that different from Enemy Territory, yet they managed to add a lot of things: artillery for the Field Ops, new playable race (not better or worse than humans), vehicles, more objectives...

But hey, if a PC game sells only 60k while the console versions had over a million purchases, this means that people can show very nicely how they feel about being ripped off.

 

[ACM_Shadow]

L4D2 is a biatch cose i got L4D1 a while ago and cant justify spending money on something when i know ill just run around with a melee weapon smashing anything i can, and now they stopped supporting L4D, oh well, TF2 demo sword ftw!
Also i dont mind DLC, its the cost of it that should get the developers shot, DArigins-(help me with this quest, cool dlc content, WTF GOTTA PAY FOR IT!!!!)
Also things like killing floor, new characters for $2, but at least the only difference with the DLC is a SKIN!!!! (PS:modded/reskinned a killing floor character to make him look exactly like one of the dlc characters).
Ultimately small things should be (free)DLC, eg:doom 3 exp pack, battlefield 2 special forces (yes i know these are ancient, BF2 still rules though). And anything that takes more than 3/4's of the time the original took to finish should be a new game.

 

[Halceon]

All games should be expansion packs for chess. ALL GAMES ON ANY MEDIA.

 

[Cyberjester]

I agree it has become ridiculous. It's proven multiple times that the changes made in Left 4 Dead 2 meant that it could not have been DLC for the first game. Now it's fine to believe that it's not worth full price. That's your opinion, and your entitled to it. But saying it should have been DLC is just stupid.


It's weird. Gamers criticize companies for making to much DLC, and then they condemn them when they make sequels instead of DLC. Gamers are never satisfied.

The main reason there was such a hullabaloo over L4D2 was that it was so soon after the first one. Now, in most games, that's no bad thing. For a game that relies on multiplayer, that's terrible.

Most people upgraded to L4D2, that means not as many people on L4D1, means less servers, means less people, repeat until game is dead.

If they were just going to release a 3 new campaigns with 4 new characters and a few extra weapons, then yes, it should have been DLC. They didn't, they expanded upon the original quite nicely. I'm still going with it's too soon, or at least too highly priced, but that's more for the sake of it.


There are some games which should have been expansion packs instead of free to download (this from a broke student p.o.v.), cause really. Have you seen the size of the WoW patches?! I like the support, but a 1.2GB patch is getting insane.

The problem with DLC's and games nowadays is:

1: DLC's are generally overpriced for the content added to the game. $10 for 5 maps when a modder will give them to you for free. I know, quality and all, it just looks bad from an uneducated point of view.

2: They make games which contain very little new content and call it a sequel, first thing everyone thinks is, this soooooooooo wasn't worth the $$$ I just spent on it..

If a game isn't going to contain much new content then they should drop the price as it isn't a new game and shouldn't be treated as such. If a game is going to kill off another one, like in the case of L4D and L4D2, then the price should again be dropped. Otherwise you're going to get reallllllly annoyed gamers.

Heh.. Series of posts above mine say L4D2 has some new gore generators which they couldn't have put in the original game.

I'm an Aussie.. Your argument has no validity in my country.

If anything, I think the visuals may have gone down.. Non-cracked and the lack of blood is unnerving..

Dude, the New Testament should totally have been an expansion pack for the Old Testament.

[small]I may just be making that up. Also, I'm probably going to Hell now.[/small]

But seriously. At some point, the whining has to stop.

It is. =P Technically speaking..
.>

Also, what's a Banana Slap? And is the Banana dipped in nitrogen?

 

[Cyberjester]

All games should be expansion packs for chess. ALL GAMES ON ANY MEDIA.

Found a rather fun chess game, when you take a piece, they have a small animation. Pawn stabs them, Knight runs them down with a lance, etc. Then there was another with magic.. It's amazing what you can do with Chess..

 

[Kermi]

The only problem I have with DLC is that there's stuff that plainly should have been included in the game, and it's only being released as DLC for the extra cash.

So many titles have day one or week one DLC, it's ridiculous.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Map Packs for PC games (I can understand it on the console, PC games and dedicated servers make it obsolete)

Okay, can we stop that already?

I have to give you that, I ment that SOME maps are really good and free this differs from game to game, TF2 is a nice example though because almost every map they added on the pc version was a community map taken in by valve.

 

[Cyberjester]

But L4D2 SHOULD have been an update/expansion. There were not any MAJOR graphical improvements and there were new models introduced. Big deal. I personally did not buy it because I could not justify spending 40 bucks on a game I practically already had. With better main characters, too.

because there was so much characterization.

sorry, couldn't resist.

O.T: the most ridiculous one is the one you put, which is that assassins creed 2 should have been DLC. that's ridiculous.

I still liked the originals best, mostly just because of Francis and Pills-Here Louis.

well, in a few months there will be downlodable content that adds them into L4D2, so if you did buy it, you can still play as your favourite characters, if you get DLC.

But do the characters have the same ai? This may sound weird, but I really like Zoey, she generally grabs the hunting rifle and spends her time shooting hunters off of me. And any character saves my life more than once is awesome.

[small]Louis just shoots me randomly, so I'm fine if he's not in it[/small]

 

[Woodsey]

I fail to see how L4D2 is sort of reasonable?

The game has 5 new campaigns, characters, updated AI director, weapons, items and improved graphics.

The thing that pisses me off is a £5 DLC that gets released on release day when the game's full price already.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Hmm. I'm not really sure how to take this one. There are some things that could very easily have just been DLC, but there are other things that are whole changes to the game. At a certain point you've added a whole second game to the original game, giving yourself twice as many maps, characters, swag, etc as the first, so it could stand alone as it's own game. Other times it still focuses about what the first game did, so it's still DLC. Should L4D2 have been its own? Sure, because it more than doubles the original content of the first, in a totally new environment, with added mechanics for a variety of melee weapons, such like that. I think we've hit a point where, when you do a second title, it actually depends on the DLC released for the original game whether the second title will be a sequel or a second, altogether-different-but-entirely-similar game.

Huh. I guess I did know where I was going with that. And sweet mother of all things worth swearing over, how the Fuck did I get a papercut between two of my toes?? And why is there nothing more unpainful but impossibly itchy??

 

[Abedeus]

You do know that console version is still unbalanced because of all the changes that happened only on the PC?

Also, there are filters for official maps.

Yup, and that's why I stopped playing.

Also, the filters for official maps take down such a huge portion of the servers at this point that it becomes really hard to find a game with open slots and a good ping.

And there's still the issue with people having a different playstyle based on framerate and screen and mouse resolution.

But, hey, I'm not saying everybody should agree with me. I'm just saying that despite having played multiplayer FPSs on the PC since Doom, I'm one of the people who think the FPS experience is far superior on consoles, with a level playing field technically and having to rely on teamwork and tactics rather than superexpensive rigs enhancing twitchy gameplay.

I'm pretty sure that when an engineer (a single character) requires a teamwork to be taken down, there is something seriously wrong.

Also, no, FPS games are superior on PCs. Sorry. The skill lies in fast reactions and keen eye. And precise hand. In consoles, it's usually spray and pray.

I can't imagine trying to play Sniper on an Xbox. God... It would be more of a luck than "who can aim and shoot better". Which I thought FPS games were all about.

 

[Dys]

that every call of duty after the first one should have been DLC.

I'd argue that every call of duty after the first one (with the possibly exception of the second) should not have been developed, but I suppose that's a rather steep tangent.

I can see the argument with the majority of games. Less so..ok, fine, not at all in the assasins creed case, but most certainly in CoD6 to CoD4 (and they had the nerve to bump the price up as well? I'll pass, even if nobody else does) and Left 4 dead 2 to left for dead, though I do consider at as such with it's price tag of less than half the average price of PC games in Australia.

DLCs like the infamous horse armour in oblivion, or the notably less infamous character skins of killing floor I'm fine with, oddly enough. In fact, I rather strongly approve of the system GTA seems to have adopted, offering expansions both as stand alone DLCs or combined as an expansion.

"they should just stop working on making Bioshock 2 and just make it a DLC"

I went fucking nuts.

Then you may be pleased to know that there are those within the enthusiast gaming community who wish it was cut off completely. (I know, I know, enough with the tangents) but seriously between the fascist DRM and...I'd like to say boring but that really does to an injustice to all that is boring, gunplay the pretty graphics were barely relevant.

It truely baffles me as to why this game so consistantly gets praise when games like crysis and farcry 2 are so consistantly shunned despite both have far more original stories (yes, that's right, relative originality, neither were a copy paste of the respective studios former story lines slapped into a steampunk setting. Yes, I am straight up claiming that generic bad aliens in crysis was more original than bioshock), even prettier graphics and gameplay that is so far beyond comparison I feel the need to throw in a lol (guns that could actually kill enemies, iron sites, far more open and dynamic firefights etc etc).

I can't imagine trying to play Sniper on an Xbox. God... It would be more of a luck than "who can aim and shoot better". Which I thought FPS games were all about.

In my experience it tends to be a case of "Are you in Australia, tough shit, this server is hosted accross the pacific and you lose by default", or sometimes accross asia in some rare cases. My experience dictates that success in console FPS multiplayer is entirely reliant on how competitently the matchmaking decides to host your game. So, quoted for truth I suppose (I'm aware I'm preaching to the quior, I'm just in a quoting mood).

 

[Gather]

I'm sure Broken Steel wasn't meant to be the 'true' ending until they saw the rage that was generated from the original one... If it had followed the way of first two fallouts (I dunno... A decent variety of endings instead of ~4) I would have been happy.

The thing that pisses me off is a £5 DLC that gets released on release day when the game's full price already.

If you were to talk about Dragon Age there... What could you do to make the digital Collectors editions unique and worth the price tag increase?

Edit: Heck, the normal physical copy of the collectors edition apart from "You get this free flimsy map and this horrible model!"

 

[Woodsey]

I'm sure Broken Steel wasn't meant to be the 'true' ending until they saw the rage that was generated from the original one... If it had followed the way of first two fallouts (I dunno... A decent variety of endings instead of ~4) I would have been happy.

The thing that pisses me off is a £5 DLC that gets released on release day when the game's full price already.

If you were to talk about Dragon Age there... What could you do to make the digital Collectors editions unique and worth the price tag increase?

Edit: Heck, the normal physical copy of the collectors edition apart from "You get this free flimsy map and this horrible model!"

You can't; collector's editions are made for the weak; people think it makes them more of a fan but, in truth, only makes them a laughing stock of those who can see that they're total shite.