Whats the problem with day 1 dlc
- Thread starter Pat8u
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Apparently you don't understand what DLC is. It's not 'something you get that adds to the game that isn't just cosmetic', it's ANYTHING that you didn't have upon obtaining the disk/download.Woodsey said:
Funny how it's always the rabid valve fanboys like you who are all 'oh people who don't agree with me are morons, durrhurrhurr, I'll ignore that there's a lot of people in this thread who find this extremely disagreeable'.
Reported, furthermore.
My my, you are touchy.Bill Bread said:
I didn't say I agree with the store particularly, and of course they're overpriced. But if it adds nothing, and it detracts nothing, there is no problem.
The problem comes when, say, characters look like they may have been cut - the Exiled Prince in DA2 for example. Now, even then, while I don't agree, you can see they're often created as after thoughts and weren't supposed to be in the game anyway. These are things you can change so that the one other person you play co op with can see. Big deal.
And the morons I was referring to are the people who have been making stuff up on Metacritic and giving massively negative scores for whatever reason (trolling). That's where the whole idea of this being Day 1 DLC comes from. Its not day 1 DLC, its a texture pack. DLC has certain connotations - for instance, I downloaded Portal 2, I don't call the game DLC, even though that's technically what it is.
There is no extra content for you to play, and it doesn't cut anything out.
And if you can earn the skins through simply playing anyway (don't know about that yet, haven't finished) it matters even less.
This guy's summed it up better than I have:
meowchef said:
Day 1 DLC is meant to get you to buy the game in a way that provides revenue for the companies that make the game. If you buy a game that is preowned all the money goes to the shop you bought it from. Buy it new and part of the money you paid has gone to the developers.
Day 1 DLC is to encourage you to buy the game new so the developers don't get screwed over by places like GameStop, Gamestation, HMV, GAME etc.
Day 1 DLC is to encourage you to buy the game new so the developers don't get screwed over by places like GameStop, Gamestation, HMV, GAME etc.
no they are not if you buy the game new its included.BlastedTheWorm said:
for the love of god go watch the extra credit episode project $10. They dont do this to get money off of you the people who buy the game new they do it to get money from the used game sells. Stop bitching about something that only effects people who are too cheap to buy the game new or too impatiant to wait till the price drops.xPixelatedx said:
Some of these things are considered ordering bonuses. Currently I have Lego Pirates on pre-order and I'm set to receive a physical Lego Jack Sparrow for free... afterwards, it's only available as a $2.99 purchase. This is just marketing 101.silver wolf009 said:
What seems to get a lot of panties in a twist is when this is translated to virtual goods. If you pre-ordered LittleBigPlanet 2 from a certain chain, you got a TRON costume for your sack person. Said costume was only available if you pre-ordered from that particular store, if you bought the Collector's Edition, or if you shelled out a bit of money for the DLC.
It's exactly the same principle as getting a free Jack Sparrow Lego figure. It's simply an incentive to pre-order the game, with an option to purchase at a later time if you don't pre-order.
The net affect on the game is nil. It's a purely cosmetic alteration to the game. Just Cause 2 has various weapons and vehicles available for purchase (including one you get if you bought the game new). They're basically little toys you use inside the game and have virtually no effect on the game, since everything is (more or less) duplicated by other weapons or vehicles. It really comes down to whether or not you think purchasing a hover-craft with an auto-cannon is worth an extra buck.
Another good example of this is the Midnight Show bonus for The Saboteur (free if you bought the game new), which adds boobies, a burlesque show, and a knife-throwing mini-game. Cool to have, fun to play around with, but nothing even remotely essential.
These are the sort of Day One DLCs I don't see any problem with. Yeah, it would be nice if they were shipped with the game, but they were often developed as a bonus item for the game, a promotional tool to either get you to pre-order the game or buy it new. Basic rule of thumb is that it should be cool without being terribly useful.
So far, about the only game whose incidental DLC pissed me off is Fables III, because it made no attempt to hide the missing elements. Want to dye your outfits black, tough luck, that's a Day 1 DLC... but notice how there's an obviously missing slot in the middle of your dye collection. Hope you don't have OCD.
Is it just cosmetic stuff for Portal 2 then, like hats in TF2? Then I have no issues with that to be honest, I'll just ignore it.
The actual Day 1 DLC with content pisses me off though. The worst, by far is the Exiled Prince for Dragon Age 2, which with all quests combined was like 90 minutes tops, and Sebastian was possibly the most annoying companion in any game I've ever played.
The actual Day 1 DLC with content pisses me off though. The worst, by far is the Exiled Prince for Dragon Age 2, which with all quests combined was like 90 minutes tops, and Sebastian was possibly the most annoying companion in any game I've ever played.
i honestly don't care if it's cosmetic (but it's still stupid that to make your character look like you want them to you have to pay extra, especially since skins are not particularly difficult to make compared to gameplay and level design- patching multiplayer is much more difficult and fiddly than reskinning a character), but if it's stuff that could be gameplay related, then it pisses me off. it's the same reason i hate stupid bullshit games that give you a weapon available for multiplayer use because you pre-ordered the game- that's unfair to people who don't want to pay extra money to compete with other players
I know a thousand people already said this, but from what I've always been told, is that the day one DLC is simply worked on after the game is being finished, but before it can be marketed, created and shipped. If it wasn't for day 1 DLC, everyone would stop working on the game and move on to a new project. This is just a way for them to get a little bit more work in, but they of course get paid to make this extra stuff. The game is 'done' there wouldn't be too much reason to have people work on it, and of course they are getting their salaries, so we have to pay them for that work somehow.
Though of course there is always a bit of abuse.
Though of course there is always a bit of abuse.
I agree that DLC is generally causing trouble for the industry because it gives publishers another excuse to release games before they're finished; therefore those that do buy the game on its release date will only get a decent game if it sells well.
Portal 2, however, is not an example of this. What they are offering is a variety of character skins and appearances for purchase with real world money. This is not DLC, it's a micro-transaction, learn the difference. One is a patch fixer/content expander, the other is a business model. And it's not like it's being shoved down the player's throat. To be blunt, if people wouldn't pay for this the option wouldn't be there; Valve would have just left the character models as they were. If the game had advertised visual customisation for the co-op characters and then forced the player to pay extra for that feature then you would be right in feeling cheated, but the game didn't state that as a feature on the description, so you in no way 'bought' the ability to customise your characters with the game. All I'm reading from this is "I want this but I don't want to pay for it." Don't bash the proprietor because you don't intend to buy one of their products.
Valve would only have put this micro-transaction option in the game, having tested it with TF2, if it had proven a successful business model, that proves that a lot of people believe it is worth the cost and are willing to buy the extra products. To be honest I'm glad because that means Valve has more capital with which to develop future titles. If you don't feel that a game without character customisation is worth a premium price tag then don't buy it, but I guarantee you're in the minority and you won't change anything. Being truthful, I see no difference between this approach and a 'collector's edition' version of the game, except this way you can decide exactly what calenders, paperweights and other merchandise you want so that 2/3 of it doesn't end up in the bin.
Portal 2, however, is not an example of this. What they are offering is a variety of character skins and appearances for purchase with real world money. This is not DLC, it's a micro-transaction, learn the difference. One is a patch fixer/content expander, the other is a business model. And it's not like it's being shoved down the player's throat. To be blunt, if people wouldn't pay for this the option wouldn't be there; Valve would have just left the character models as they were. If the game had advertised visual customisation for the co-op characters and then forced the player to pay extra for that feature then you would be right in feeling cheated, but the game didn't state that as a feature on the description, so you in no way 'bought' the ability to customise your characters with the game. All I'm reading from this is "I want this but I don't want to pay for it." Don't bash the proprietor because you don't intend to buy one of their products.
Valve would only have put this micro-transaction option in the game, having tested it with TF2, if it had proven a successful business model, that proves that a lot of people believe it is worth the cost and are willing to buy the extra products. To be honest I'm glad because that means Valve has more capital with which to develop future titles. If you don't feel that a game without character customisation is worth a premium price tag then don't buy it, but I guarantee you're in the minority and you won't change anything. Being truthful, I see no difference between this approach and a 'collector's edition' version of the game, except this way you can decide exactly what calenders, paperweights and other merchandise you want so that 2/3 of it doesn't end up in the bin.
I think the best example is Assassin's creed 2. You literally skipped two chapters (or w/e they called them) you could buy later on. Luckily they did fit in the ending. Or maybe not.
Day one DLC is the developers deciding that, while you are a paying customer, you could paying more, for stuff they already made. They slice off stuff you should be getting, and charge you for it because they know enough people will buy it to make it worth it.
It's dickish to a high degree, and any game that does it gets purchased used, so they don't get any money.
It's dickish to a high degree, and any game that does it gets purchased used, so they don't get any money.
The reason most people, myself included, despise day 1 dlc is simple: It's largely only things that were purposefully excluded from the game to try and milk more money from the consumer. If they are going to charge the cost of a full game then by all means, give us the whole game.Patrick Young said:
It's becoming a really ugly trend this day one dlc. It used to be that DLC was something you could buy that would add value to your game, something that you hadn't already paid the development costs for. Now you see games coming out with fewer characters or fewer maps and we are expected to buy DLC to make up the difference, to bring the value up to a full retail product from the pared down offerings we're paying an increasingly high amount for. Now the "full" version of many games can run you upwards of 80 dollars. All while we see industry profits soar. It's leading to a very ugly place, a scenario is easy to picture where we simply buy a game engine for an inflated amount and purchase everything else piecemeal. It would be fine to buy a game's story mode and only pay for multiplayer deathmatch if we didn't pay the same price we would for a game with both and there are games that are doing this, right now.
Why does anyone care? does this day 1 DLC affect your game play? Do you really need a new skin to play the game? No? then good, just play the damn game and get over it
