Is anyone else tired of buying incomplete games?

[Something Amyss]

Just because a game has DLC doesn't mean it's an incomplete game. That's just self-entitled whining of the highest order.

The flip-side to this, however, is that game companies whine we're not buying games at launch (when it's most important), while they've trained us to wait for GOTY versions, price drops, and GOTY version price drops. They'll even advertise the game in a way that says the DLC is important to the story, the way the game was meant to be played, etc.

It's not hard to see why people feel entitled to such content if we're being programmed to believe it's so integral.

 

[sanquin]

It's the companies trying to find their golden line to follow. Leave too much out? There will be too little buyers and not enough money is made. Leave too much in? Plenty of people will buy it, but less opportunity to cash in on the same game later. And right now they're still trying to figure out what that golden middle line is. Which is why some games barely have anything left out, and others just leave out way too much. That's how I see it anyway.

Don't get me wrong though. I don't mind this kind of tactic. If a game leaves in just enough to be worth your money, but leaves some things to be added later for the fans to buy, then great! As long as I at least get to play 'just enough' for the game to be worth it.

 

[Brotha Desmond]

I don't think Dishonored is the best example to use in this case. To me Mass Effect 3 was an unfinished product. Almost every piece of story DLC they sold was, in my opinion anyway, pivotal to the story. Leviathan, Omega, and Citadel DlC's, as well as Day one, explains a lot of what feels like was missing. I can understand wanting to make money for a product, but if you bought every piece of DLC it was like paying for the game twice.

 

[TheCommanders]

I kind of think you gave bad examples of incomplete games. The best example I can think of that I've bought recently (not saying it just got released recently, but I only bought it a few months ago) was the Sims 3. Dozens, if not hundreds of items that were included with the previous games (The Sims, The Sims 2) were in the game when released, but given real money price tags. Hell, you only get like 8 hairstyles to pick from by default, and bloody hot tubs aren't even included in the vanilla release. Hot. Tubs. Seriously. Also, I'm not a big fan of fighting games (just personal preference) but I hear that a lot of those have huge problems with putting price tags on characters that ship with the game, which is just greedy and insulting (like they think we won't notice, please...).

 

[sagitel]

no. im not tired of buying DLC for games i want more of them

and about your examples: in dishonored daud is as good as any other character in the game, they are all just some names and titles and you know very little beyond that. the game was complete. no gameplay or story aspects were held off or if they were noone found out or felt like that.

in bioshock yes fitzroy in underdeveloped comparing to some other characters (like the lutece but she is way more important though) anyway we know enough of fitzroy. her life before columbia is not of importance because it doesn't change her as much as columbia. and in columbia she is basically a maid. a normal maid. then the leader of a black revolution. we know enough of her to understand her. we know enough to see why she does what she does. and just like dishonored to gameplay or story sections were left out of game.

 

[DanielBrown]

Figured this thread was about bug ridden games...
Well, I don't particulary like day-one DLC, but if it comes out after a while and the game doesn't disappoint I don't mind at all. It's great that they can expand to games easily these days, rather than the expansions of old, though they usually had way more features to make it worth the money. I never buy any DLC though. Felt so damn ripped off after getting some for Dragon Age: Origins three+ years back that I haven't bothered since.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

Just don't buy the game untill all the DLC comes out.

Thats what I'm doing with Inifnite.

I do that as well...in most cases you even pay less by doing this too so win-win (unless you're the kind of person who ABSOLUTELY NEEDS your games on day 1) I don't like that I have to do that but it's better in some ways than how it was in the past: What I mean is, I think it's better to buy a game that can be expanded upon now than to buy a glitched-out bug fest 15 years ago.

Ya know what game was incomplete this past generation? Dark Void but ya know what, it was still an awesome freaking game for what it was.

What really pissed me off was how EA/Bioware started withholding characters and, missions from Mass Effect 2 and 3. It's a moot point now but it's too late for my main Shepard to have met and interacted with what's-his-name from Mass Effect 2 and, the Prothian from ME3.

 

[randomrob1968]

I don't mind any incompleteness, as long as the publisher is up front with it. Development can be a nightmare these days.

 

[A3sir]

You have no grounds to complain about DLC unless you are an avid Train Simulator player.

 

[ZeroMachine]

I'm so fucking sick and tired of this bullshit argument.

And the examples you gave are some of the worst I've ever fucking seen.

Both of those games are fantastically polished and complete by themselves. The DLC is just "FUCK YA MORE OF THE GOOD STUFF!"

For fuck's sake, if you're gonna ***** about a not-really-incomplete game, at least ***** about a game that actually feels incomplete.

Fuck.

 

[Sight Unseen]

An incomplete story indicates that actual story segments that are needed for the game are left out. Look at L.A. Noire. Some of the content present in the PS3 version of the game on launch was DLC content for the 360 version, yet, even if you didn't have the DLC content on the 360, the game still referenced those story moments as if you were expected to understand them. Anyone who bought the game on the 360 did receive an incomplete story.

BioShock Infinite, on the other hand, wasn't incomplete (or at least not in that way). Fitzroy's character was developed enough so the player could understand her motivations and place in the story. She was obviously tired of the racism and class divide in Colombia, was crazy enough to kill Lady Comstock, wanted to completely overthrow Comstock in a violent revolution, and she was crazy enough to kill innocent children in the process. Sure, you don't understand every little detail that happened to her while serving the Comstocks, but given what you see and hear around Colombia, you don't need to understand what happened specifically to her, just what happened to minorities in general, and going in-depth on her specific character would have made an already convoluted story even more convoluted. If anything, the game had too much on her and Colombia's/America's politics and culture, especially when you consider that all of it was pointless except to provide a catalyst by which to drive the actual story.

Small off-topic plot point that you got a bit wrong: Fitzroy didn't kill Lady Comstock. Comstock killed Lady Comstock because she knew about the Lutece's experiments and thought that Comstock's daughter was a love child between Comstock and Lutece. Comstock killed her to keep her silent to avoid exposing what the Luteces were actually doing. Fitzroy was a housekeeper for Lady Comstock and got framed because she was conveniently black. It's the reason why she rebelled in the first place.

OT: Bioshock Infinite and Dishonored were complete games IMO

 

[LetalisK]

but faulting Dishonored is...a bit dishonourable, I think.

Oh, that's just a cheap shot. Trying to make us feel bad about saving some ink?

OT: There are possibly games you could accuse of what the OP is saying, but I don't think Dishonored or Bioshock Infinite are those games.

 

[Odbarc]

Buy Game of the Year Editions.

 

[GalanDun]

If you'd mentioned something like Marvel vs Capcom 3, Mass Effect 3, Black Ops 2, or something else, I'd agree with you.
Because I've never seen any critic complain about that in either of those games you talked about. I'm not saying that DLC is a good thing, expansions are better and finished games more so, but it sounds like you're trying to find something to complain about.

 

[NiPah]

Are you complaining about poor writing or incomplete games? For one thing Bioshock has been out for nearly 5 years now so you're crazy if you think they have some as of yet unannounced DLC coming out to flesh out the backstory on some side characters, you're meant to fill in the bits and pieces yourself because some games don't want to spell it out. As far as Dishonored is concerned yes you're getting more story but by that logic you can complain that Starwars 4/5/6 were incomplete because they didn't flesh out Vader's backstory.

This sort of thing has been happening in media for ages, they will hint as missing pieces as yet to be filled in while offering a full story for you to enjoy now, I'm in no way annoyed that some pieces are left unexplained (unless they're plot holes) and for the most part I like them better left that way.

As for the whole anti-DLC BS, not really buying it, it's just a cheaper form of expansions and sequels that tie in better to the original content.

 

[DoPo]

but faulting Dishonored is...a bit dishonourable, I think.

Oh, that's just a cheap shot. Trying to make us feel bad about saving some ink?

xD No, I just have to force myself to miss out the "u" every time I mention the game by title. Also, my spell-checker complains about it.

The absolute irrefutable fact that having missing out "u" is the cancer upon English language that is killing it is, of course...erm, absolute and irrefutable. Moreover, every time you miss out the letter, a cat refuses to do a funny thing. You are what's wrong in the world, you.

Felt so damn ripped off after getting some for Dragon Age: Origins three+ years back that I haven't bothered since.

Eh, those DLC weren't anything special. A new character and few side quests, you could totally go without them. They were mostly...bland, I guess.

 

[viranimus]

Ohkay

Forgoing the elitist faction gone hatefully nuts here.

Under normal circumstances I personally am loathed to call a game where DLC is anticipated and expected that adds any sort of narrative "complete" It has been progressing and it is essentially that some games by certain companies are designed from the ground up with the expectation of having X block of "primary" content to be sold first then to consequently be followed by blocks of DLC which exist so as developers essentially can make essentially two sales off of one game as the DLC content combined and/or GOTY/GH/Ultimate/We are just bundling all this to create a fresh SKU that can be justified full market price"

I do not like it... BUT on certain levels I can at least understand it and accept it is at least not a complete customer screw over. In fact if it were done correctly I could actually fully support the practice. However like it or not it is still your responsibility as a consumer, not the corporation filling their role in capitalism. If you "KNOW" a game will have additional narrative centric expansions (such as basically ANYTHING from Bethesda that has a story, Bioware, etc) then if you buy the game on the day of release you willingly bought that "incomplete" game.

For example, personally I have yet to play skyrim. A major reason for that is because as far as I am concerned, Skyrims release date was 06.04.2013 (or round about, the point of release of the "legendary" edition where all possible DLC was bundled into one product).. NOT 11.11.11 So given that I DO see a game with expected narrative DLC as an incomplete game, I will not buy it until it is what I would see as complete. That means in my view the game has only really been "out" for little over a month.

To me buying before that point is essentially buying the same game twice. Again, I do not like it, but if that is how it is going to be sold, It is my economic responsibility to withhold my purchase until they have decided they are "done" with it. It is my economic responsibility express my dissatisfaction by only buying once and NOT rewarding them for selling in this fashion. And most importantly it is my economic responsibility to not fall prey to my personal desires and impatience.

Having that patience is not JUST economic. It is simply logical. I have increasingly less time to play anything. So I personally do NOT wish to play through most games more than one complete playthrough. So in cases of expected DLC adding narrative, it only makes sense to do as I have done with Skyrim and simply waiting because all that content I will have access to in one playthrough with no worries of backtracking and sequencing.

But I digress.

My issue with this thread is more along the focus of Daisy Fitzroy. I grant you she is an important part of the early to mid part of the story, But she served the purpose she was there for in the narrative. She was an secondary/ancillary character. She was a plot device. While I feel that BSIs biggest failing was "Fringe"ing out the story and fading away from the whole Founders v. Vox Pop conflict and not making more of a statement of relevance on the issues, really the notion that Daisy or the VP "requires" more exploration is questionable. As far as I am concerned, added backstory and exploration into the founder/VP conflict might be interesting but is secondary to what the actual plot of the game is and really I am content NOT knowing that content because I am completely content with the conclusion of that game.

So I "DO" get the point, but I really feel that the problem is more of an internal one as nothing says you HAVE to play it the moment it is released. However I wonder how much of that is generational as I was raised in the generation with mottos like "If Ive I have not seen/heard/read/experienced it... its new to me" rather than more recent generations that were raised on instant gratification and everything "On Demand"

 

[DoPo]

Bioshock has been out for nearly 5 years now so you're crazy if you think they have some as of yet unannounced DLC coming out to flesh out the backstory on some side characters

I think OP means Bioshock: Infinite, it is known that they are working on a DLC at the moment.

 

[knight steel]

I agree with you-[although I admit I have a personal bias]-for you see due to the way my house is set up I am unable to connect my console to the internet with is needed to buy DLC,which means it impossible for me to buy them.

So when I really good looking DLC comes out I feel left out and excluded especially when the DLC is significant amount of content therefore while the game is not incomplete is feels like it is for me.

Special game of the year editions help and I always wait to buy them instead of getting games day one but not all games do them so I end I up having to just rent them instead

 

[Drauger]

Worst examples in mho

Asura's wrath
Resident Evil 5
Mass Effect 2-3
Marvel Vs Capcom 3
Batman Arkham city
Dead or Alive 5

Now seeing how capcom has so many enties (at least in my list)and some areeven worst , dlc included in the disk yeah this is really bullshit, now a days we get the games out of pieces and we end up paying almost the double of the full price for one game, if you just like to give away your money well fucking good for you.

The whole dlc thing is so wrong in some many ways, it could be done in a better way like dark souls did, but paying every fucking month for 2 more outfits and a character, a mode or worst a fucking piece of story is fucking the customer, and the worst is that after reading most comments here, the customers are happy to be fucked.