Portal 2 - DLC Backlash

[Jatyu]

You guys know you can also unlock the stuff just by playing the game right?

The payments are for the lazy people.

 

[Knight Templar]

You guys know you can also unlock the stuff just by playing the game right?

The payments are for the lazy people.

Everything?
Even if there are some items you must pay for it seems very foolish to condemn the game over letting people buy stuff, when that stuff can be earned through gameplay.

 

[The Random One]

This is hilarious, but got boring fast. Call me when someone uses the Scanners head exploding gif.

 

[Bill Bread]

The reviews, from what I'm reading, are to discourage shit like this in future titles, from Valve or any dev. Which suits me fine.

 

[the Dept of Science]

All I think is that anyone that pays £3 for a virtual hat is batshit insane.

 

[Xannieros]

The DLC is worthless and anyone buying it is wasting their money. It was like $2.99-$4.99 for character appearance changes. They shouldn't have charged for it, should be unlockable through levels and achievements.

 

[FaceFaceFace]

The comparisons to withholding condiments are way off. These aren't the equivalents of condiments, they're food coloring to be added to your food. Extra money for something not only ENTIRELY pointless, but also potentially even straight-up unwanted. Now lets stop crying and think with portals, please.

 

[WanderingFool]

IT IS ALL COSMETIC.

IT CAN ALL BE UNLOCKED WITHOUT PAYING A PENNY.

It's sad how successful the metabombing was, even if the scores are going up now that it's stopped it's left tons of people misinformed over the content of the game.

- Game lasts more than 4 hours, I clocked 7 hours single player and 4 1/2 hours co-op.

- It is not a console port, Valve just kept all the text in the same string and forgot to remove a couple lines pertaining to consoles in their rush to get the game certified.

- There is no DLC, cosmetic items are NOT DLC, all items can be obtained simply by playing the game if you do not wish to purchase from the store. They are unlockables, having the option to buy said unlockables does not make Valve evil.

Valve seriously did that? lol...

Anyways, if its all cosmetic, I see no real problem with it being sold, and if what this guy is saying is true (I havent played the game, so I dont know personally) are you really getting upset over it? Its all fucking cosmetic, it makes no difference to gameplay as far as I can understand. It just sounds like everyone complaining are a bunch of self-entitled cunts.

If the content in question is stuff that should have been in the game, and actually has some significant purpose other than allowing you to look different from everyone else, than yeah, there would be an actual legit reason to be upset. But this is COSMETIC shit! What point does it have than to make you look different? For comparison, The Stone Prisoner DLC for DA:O, that shit should have been on the disc (though I bought it new, thus still got it for free), the ME2 armor pack for Garrus, Thane, and Jack (which is just different costumes with no benefit at all... NO BENEFITS AT ALL!!!), extra crap you can buy if you want, but doesnt effect anything. If the former, than there is a legit reason to *****, if the latter, which I do believe the Portal 2 stuff basically is, than why are people complaining? Good Fucking God...

 

[NickCaligo42]

This is like people Metacritic-bombing Oblivion for not including Horse Armor in the retail version.

 

[Dense_Electric]

The reviews, from what I'm reading, are to discourage shit like this in future titles, from Valve or any dev. Which suits me fine.

I... really don't even know how to argue with you. It's very difficult to argue with someone when every single point they make is totally illogical and based entirely on childish emotional flares. Either you're one of the best trolls I've ever seen or you REALLLLLLYYYY want those hats. Seriously, is that it? Do the hats just MAKE the game for you? The whole of Portal 2 just revolves around the fucking hats? Without the hats the whole game experience just ceases to be? Really, what is it? I would love to get inside your head, it's got to be one fucked up place.

 

[The Lunatic]

I find it insulting that they'd think people would actually pay for this.

Then I remembered there are people who would.

It should be free, Christ it's fucking emotes and skins, and I can understand the feeling that a it would seem a lot of people are feeling.

It's more about sending a message of "We're tired of this shit" than "FUCK YOU AND EVERYTHING YOU STAND FOR THIS GAMES SUCKS DUE TO HATS".

 

[Theron Julius]

Its just fucking hats people. Seriously, are hats and costumes so god damn important to you that it makes the game inherently worse?

WAAAH! WE DON'T GET PURELY COSMETIC ITEMS FOR FREE! VALVE AND PORTAL 2 TOTALLY SUCK BECAUSE OF THIS! WAAAH!

Jesus, its one thing to be pissed about hefty content being released for a price at day one, but some fucking hats and skins? Come on.

Exactly. They aren't cutting you off from a chunk of the game by doing this. It's just some hats and skins that don't actually add to the experience at all. There are far better things to ***** about.

 

[Bags159]

I find it insulting that they'd think people would actually pay for this.

Then I remembered there are people who would.

It should be free, Christ it's fucking emotes and skins, and I can understand the feeling that a it would seem a lot of people are feeling.

It's more about sending a message of "We're tired of this shit" than "FUCK YOU AND EVERYTHING YOU STAND FOR THIS GAMES SUCKS DUE TO HATS".

You can unlock a lot of them through SP, CO-op and achievements.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

*Snip*

It definitely won't score points with the seemingly growing entitlement crowd in the gaming community, but this is my stance on the matter:

I don't care what is on day one DLC. If you don't like the decision that the creators made before shipping the game, tough. It is their product and they can do what they think is best for their business and what they think will get them the most money.

Besides, I can easily excuse day one DLC. Considering when I heard announcements that Portal 2 had gone gold(meaning that it was ready for packaging and shipping to stores), it isn't hard to think that the day one DLC might not have been finished yet. The Portal 2 announcement of gold came at least a month before the release date. It is easily believable that Portal 2's cosmetic DLC wasn't ready when it went gold.

People need to calm down and think clearly.

I wish more gamers had a mature mentality when it comes to games. If a person buys a game, it was their decision and they must face the consequences of that decision, unless the game is unplayable because of a glitch or it is broken for some reason, it is the consumer's fault if a bad purchase happens.

Valve is a business, they are the ones making the product, they can do whatever the heck they want with the product. They only thing they owe the purchaser is the guarantee that the game works, beyond that, they owe the purchaser nothing. If this content was ready before it went gold, and it could have been on the disc, but they chose to hold it back for whatever reasoning, that is their choice, they don't owe the purchaser that content because it was already ready. If they want to hold that DLC over the heads of the consumer to try and get more sales, good, it is an effective business practice, it works and keeps the company levelly funded if not more so.

I really haven't encountered any long lasting businesses that don't use normal business costumer tricking or convincing practices to get more sales. If a business doesn't work on attracting more sales in some fashion, it won't last long.

 

[John Funk]

So, what I'm hearing is that people don't have any idea how software development works? Please educate yourself [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.154083-Dragon-Age-Designer-Says-DLC-Not-Meant-to-Rip-Off-Players#3719305].

(Note: This only really applies to full-fledged Day 1 DLC, as in full characters, extra quests, etc. This is not DLC, this is microtransactions. There is a difference.)

 

[Fire Daemon]

I just want to point out that this is in fact DLC.

DLC = Downloadable Content.

Did you download it? Is it it content? That shit is DLC! Fuck, I hate how people change the name of something to something else and expect that to be enough of an argument. "It isn't Genocide, it's a Final Solution".

I haven't played the game and I probably wont for quite some time though, so I don't really care. I liked Portal, but it doesn't seem like the sort of thing that needed a sequel. It's really just catering for the idiots who wouldn't shut up about cakes and cubes for three years.

 

[Vault101]

does anyone actually know what the deal is here? because ive heard

A. it doesnt exist

B. you can get it all for free anyway

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Metacritic Critic's Score for Portal 2- 95
Metacritic Users' Score for Portal 2- Somewhere between a 5 and a 6

I wanted to facepalm so hard that it would create a sort of facepalm singularity. The way these reviews read, it's like Valve forced them to pay a further $80 to activate the game after buying it, then another $20 to move on from the first test chamber. The DLC is completely cosmetic and in no way is needed for the game in any way- heck, I wouldn't even know it existed if not for this stupid backlash. If you don't want the extra costumes and stuff, just don't buy them. It's as simple as that. Just play the game and actually try to enjoy it- you could have fun!

I picked up Portal 2 for PS3 today, and what I've played so far I've absolutely fallen in love with. It is a sublimely engineered and perfectly written game thus far, and I'm maybe an hour in. Cosmetic DLC does not change the fact that I'm enjoying the experience immensely.

I see it as just another whining fiasco like Dragon Age 2 was. People find one maybe two problems with a game, usually of a trivial nature, and instead of considering other factors and making a reasonable and thought out review and score to go along, they just give it a zero or a one.

As you said about the purely cosmetic DLC, yeah it may cost 80 dollars to get it all, but one doesn't have to buy it and it isn't essential to the game. And it is sad when people make that trivial point the anchor of their negative reviews and then give the game a zero.

To people that give such scores to games: Zeros are for games that are unplayable because of a fatal glitch, not for making statements about trivial problems about reasonable business practices. If Valve wants to charge extra money for such things, it is fine. You are not entitled to this content. If you want it, buy it. If you want it and can't afford it, play the game of real life and earn the money to get it; it will be like a real life achievement.

Bleep bloop. (Silly Hat Money)

 

[Bags159]

To people that give such scores to games: Zeros are for games that are unplayable because of a fatal glitch, not for making statements about trivial problems about reasonable business practices.

Eh, no. Games like this still get more than a zero.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/big-rigs-over-the-road-racing

I know the good ratings are satirical, but still.

 

[Bill Bread]

I really haven't encountered any long lasting businesses that don't use normal business costumer tricking or convincing practices to get more sales. If a business doesn't work on attracting more sales in some fashion, it won't last long.

GSC are still true bros, they've been putting out quality games for ages without any of this type of shit.