The Petition to Stop the Release of DLC Game Modes

[TheRockNRolla]

Survival mode features a new map though. So technically it should be charged for in your argument.

You're right. Valve was extremely generous, and that's why I love them as a developer and admire everything they do.

Then your logic of "new" is flawed. Did you have previous access to said content before? No. Now you do, which would make it new. Another thing is, you don't have to get this content of which you're crying about. Hell RE5's MP is still considered "new" since they never did it before.

I didn't have previous access, but the developers did, so why didn't they include it when the game was released? Were they rushed? Then they should have been allotted more time by the publisher, or they should provid the unlocked modes for free post-release since they are the ones who ran out of time.

And while I appreciate the discussion we're developing here, please don't attack my views by saying I'm crying about it. If you're logic is falling apart, personal attacks don't cover logical holes.

I'm not crying about anything--I'm encouraging people to make a stand. There's obviously a lot of controversy about this, so let's try and act like intelligent people and have a conversation.

See, here's the thing, I'm not trying to attack you, just pointing out what you are indeed doing. You're complaining about it being unfair to pay for it and trying to convince people that it is unfair. The people who want to make a stand wouldn't bother making a petition that the developers wont listen to. Here's why, they know that the gaming community is filled with sheep who will indeed spend the 5-10 bucks for that content. They just simply won't buy it.

I mean look at Guitar Hero. I think people shouldn't have to fork out 60 bucks for Smash Hits but they will. Should I make a petition to stop the game from being made because I disagree? Nope, it would fall of deaf ears, just like your petition.

 

[TheSapphireKnight]

Hey, battlefield bad company released a new game mode and maps for free.

 

[TheDukester]

Survival mode features a new map though. So technically it should be charged for in your argument.

You're right. Valve was extremely generous, and that's why I love them as a developer and admire everything they do.

Then your logic of "new" is flawed. Did you have previous access to said content before? No. Now you do, which would make it new. Another thing is, you don't have to get this content of which you're crying about. Hell RE5's MP is still considered "new" since they never did it before.

I didn't have previous access, but the developers did, so why didn't they include it when the game was released? Were they rushed? Then they should have been allotted more time by the publisher, or they should provid the unlocked modes for free post-release since they are the ones who ran out of time.

And while I appreciate the discussion we're developing here, please don't attack my views by saying I'm crying about it. If you're logic is falling apart, personal attacks don't cover logical holes.

I'm not crying about anything--I'm encouraging people to make a stand. There's obviously a lot of controversy about this, so let's try and act like intelligent people and have a conversation.

See, here's the thing, I'm not trying to attack you, just pointing out what you are indeed doing. You're complaining about it being unfair to pay for it and trying to convince people that it is unfair. The people who want to make a stand wouldn't bother making a petition that the developers wont listen to. Here's why, they know that the gaming community is filled with sheep who will indeed spend the 5-10 bucks for that content. They just simply won't buy it.

I mean look at Guitar Hero. I think people shouldn't have to fork out 60 bucks for Smash Hits but they will. Should I make a petition to stop the game from being made because I disagree? Nope, it would fall of deaf ears, just like your petition.

Well this was primarily more of a "Is there an audience for this kind of discussion?" than anything else. I would have to do a formal petition. But there's a statistic that states that for everyone one person who voices their opinion to a company, there are 15 others that haven't but share the same view. This is a common business theory that I don't believe has changed since I studied advertising.

If we would submit a formal petition with names to a company, they would listen. But I think a lot of people are right, that a boycott would be more effective. And personally, I have been sort of boycotting this whole time, because I view things like horse armor and VS. mode as silly.

 

[captbadmonkey]

I can't see the issue, games like GTA release extra campaigns, and other games pretty much add new maps, people always get irritated over paying 10 bucks or whatever for a game, but starting a petition? really? it's not like you'll get a bunch of people and then game companies will say "ya know, I was watching yahtzee and I saw this petition about us and well..yeah, they're right" no they'll turn their head and make more DLC, which is great

TL;DR, if you don't like that they charge for it don't buy it, if your a kid and don't have the cash don't whine lest I sic' the wambulance on your ass

Thread Hack, this topic shall now be about the new survival mode in Left 4 Dead, what do you think

oh yeah, and what's up with the new "I'm too tired to melee" reload, kinda irritating

 

[TheRockNRolla]

Well this was primarily more of a "Is there an audience for this kind of discussion?" than anything else. I would have to do a formal petition. But there's a statistic that states that for everyone one person who voices their opinion to a company, there are 15 others that haven't but share the same view. This is a common business theory that I don't believe has changed since I studied advertising.

If we would submit a formal petition with names to a company, they would listen. But I think a lot of people are right, that a boycott would be more effective. And personally, I have been sort of boycotting this whole time, because I view things like horse armor and VS. mode as silly.

And I agree that things like the VS mode are just wrong since we know it was supposed to be with the game, come release day. And the best option is just boycotting it like you and the others said.

 

[Therumancer]

Hop on Gamefaqs sometime and you'll frequently see guys show up and talk about how they went into the code of whatever game and what they found. Sometimes predicting DLC months before it's announced simply because the DLC was actually on your disc all along and your paying to unlock it.

I'm on gamefaqs all the time and 90% of the users are idiots/fanboys. Even if it's on the disc, you still don't have to buy it. You can say it's highway robbery all you want, but in the end it's the customer that makes the final choice and buys it.

EDIT: However, the RE5 dlc is a joke. They did announce it before the game was released, then charged for it. So I can see where you guys are coming from.

Yes, but that still doesn't mean that the practice itself blows chips.

To an extent it preys on the completionist tendencies of gamers (the guys who hunt down every secret package, bag every pigeon, and collect every token).

In my case there are a lot of things I simply won't buy. BUT if those things are the kind of thing that should have been there to begin with, I'm certainly going to B@tch about what they are trying to do (which is my right).

For example, take the SF IV costume content packs, of which I have not purchused any. As far as I'm concerned alternative costumes for characters are part of fighting games. They are after all one of the big things that keeps you playing (especially single player). Some franchies like Dead Or Alive having been semi-defined by their huge wardrobes of unlockable costumes.

I think it is absurd to try and charge fighting game players for what should have been in the game to begin with. I complain about it (without having bought any) because I hardly want to see future fighting games jump on the bandwagon and try and charge me for what has been part of the package of pretty much every fighting game in recent memory. To me that's not "extra". "Extra" would be entirely new characters, or a strategy game mode sort of like what Soul Calibur III had (Chronicles Of The Sword) tacked on after the fact.

Sure, nobody is holding me at gunpoint, but I'm still going to complain about unreasonable DLC because it's well.... unreasonable.

 

[TheDukester]

Hop on Gamefaqs sometime and you'll frequently see guys show up and talk about how they went into the code of whatever game and what they found. Sometimes predicting DLC months before it's announced simply because the DLC was actually on your disc all along and your paying to unlock it.

I'm on gamefaqs all the time and 90% of the users are idiots/fanboys. Even if it's on the disc, you still don't have to buy it. You can say it's highway robbery all you want, but in the end it's the customer that makes the final choice and buys it.

EDIT: However, the RE5 dlc is a joke. They did announce it before the game was released, then charged for it. So I can see where you guys are coming from.

Yes, but that still doesn't mean that the practice itself blows chips.

To an extent it preys on the completionist tendencies of gamers (the guys who hunt down every secret package, bag every pigeon, and collect every token).

In my case there are a lot of things I simply won't buy. BUT if those things are the kind of thing that should have been there to begin with, I'm certainly going to B@tch about what they are trying to do (which is my right).

For example, take the SF IV costume content packs, of which I have not purchused any. As far as I'm concerned alternative costumes for characters are part of fighting games. They are after all one of the big things that keeps you playing (especially single player). Some franchies like Dead Or Alive having been semi-defined by their huge wardrobes of unlockable costumes.

I think it is absurd to try and charge fighting game players for what should have been in the game to begin with. I complain about it (without having bought any) because I hardly want to see future fighting games jump on the bandwagon and try and charge me for what has been part of the package of pretty much every fighting game in recent memory. To me that's not "extra". "Extra" would be entirely new characters, or a strategy game mode sort of like what Soul Calibur III had (Chronicles Of The Sword) tacked on after the fact.

Sure, nobody is holding me at gunpoint, but I'm still going to complain about unreasonable DLC because it's well.... unreasonable.

And I guess the thing in my mind that separates things like new costumes versus new game modes is that some people are totally into the new costumes, which is great. What I hope is that the developer doesn't punish those who don't buy the new costumes. For instance, if you don't buy the SFIV costumes you can't play online.

I say let people interact with people who download things like new costume/horse armor/whatever. Dawn of War: 40k for the PC did this for the expansions: you could still play against people who had the content from the expansions without owning the expansions themselves. That way no one gets punished, but those who want to buy the extra stuff can.

 

[TheRockNRolla]

And I guess the thing in my mind that separates things like new costumes versus new game modes is that some people are totally into the new costumes, which is great. What I hope is that the developer doesn't punish those who don't buy the new costumes. For instance, if you don't buy the SFIV costumes you can't play online.

I say let people interact with people who download things like new costume/horse armor/whatever. Dawn of War: 40k for the PC did this for the expansions: you could still play against people who had the content from the expansions without owning the expansions themselves. That way no one gets punished, but those who want to buy the extra stuff can.

I think the problem lies in whether or not the game can operate without the ability to load said content. Like the way Rock Band 1 could not play Rock Band 2 DLC, and would get stuck at a loading screen when you tried.

 

[TheDukester]

And I guess the thing in my mind that separates things like new costumes versus new game modes is that some people are totally into the new costumes, which is great. What I hope is that the developer doesn't punish those who don't buy the new costumes. For instance, if you don't buy the SFIV costumes you can't play online.

I say let people interact with people who download things like new costume/horse armor/whatever. Dawn of War: 40k for the PC did this for the expansions: you could still play against people who had the content from the expansions without owning the expansions themselves. That way no one gets punished, but those who want to buy the extra stuff can.

I think the problem lies in whether or not the game can operate without the ability to load said content. Like the way Rock Band 1 could not play Rock Band 2 DLC, and would get stuck at a loading screen when you tried.

I agree, that's another crappy way that developers get you. Rock Band is a perfect example; there's no reason why they couldn't just keep updating Rock Band 1 with new songs. In fact, I respect them for not releasing a Rock Band 3 this year (they announced it). They should release Rock Band 3 when they add new instruments--I'm praying for a plastic saxophone so I can play some Pink Floyd songs.

 

[Sewblon]

Best form of protest against unfair DLC:

Just don't buy it

I like DannyBoy451's plan.

 

[ffxfriek]

Wait, no new game modes have been released to Halo Wars yet to my knowledge. But the Versus mode for RE 5 was a dick move, so I agree with your petition.

http://www.halowars.com/default.aspx

here for halo wars

i support all the way

 

[TheRockNRolla]

I agree, that's another crappy way that developers get you. Rock Band is a perfect example; there's no reason why they couldn't just keep updating Rock Band 1 with new songs. In fact, I respect them for not releasing a Rock Band 3 this year (they announced it). They should release Rock Band 3 when they add new instruments--I'm praying for a plastic saxophone so I can play some Pink Floyd songs.

Look at Guitar Hero. It's supposed to have 5 titles out this year. 3 we already know of. Smash Hits, a re-release of old GH songs, Modern Hits for DS, and Metallica.

 

[chronobreak]

Um... where's the link to an actual petition... You're doing it wrong, no offense. Besides, nobody takes petitions seriously. You can't complain about modes you didn't have in the first place. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

 

[megapenguinx]

Just don't buy it. Petitions are rather useless in my book

 

[JMeganSnow]

Why do you need a petition? If you don't want it, then don't buy it. That's a lot more effective in the long run than whining.

 

[Barry93]

I'm alright with DLC's as long as they are realsed on all consoles/PC that have the game.

 

[TheDukester]

Are people not reading the thread? (I answered my own question)

Read the conversation if you're still wondering why boycotting DLC isn't good enough.

 

[TheDukester]

So.. uh.. who gets to determine whether it "should" have been there in the first place?
You?

Hey.. here's a thought.. maybe that should be left up to, oh, I don't know, the guys who were developing the game.

If you think the game is missing some needed game modes at purchase time, do not purchase.

If you think it's complete, then when the developers decide to provide something extra and ask for payment in return, choose at that time whether to purchase or not. If you don't think their effort was worth it, don't buy it, and eventually they'll get the message and not put those things out.

Aww, what's that, you want it for free? Then build your own game.

So when they start charging you to unlock team deathmatch in Call of Duty 10 (Modern Warfare 5) you're going to be cool with it?

Are you okay with paying for something that you've already paid for?

I'm so tired of people saying I'm asking for free things--I'm asking for the content they intentionally left on the cutting room floor. I paid for my content when I dropped the $60 for the game. If you want to pay $60 + $5 for multiplayer + $5 for new maps + $X for whatever bullsh$t content they want to say you have to "unlock" in order to play the full game, then you go right ahead. Hopefully by then I will know how to make my own games so I don't have to have conversations like this.

 

[DannyBoy451]

Best form of protest against unfair DLC:

Just don't buy it

You won't know whether or not a game will get DLC before you buy it.

I was referring to the DLC, not the game.