Downloadable Content. Yay or nay?

Ramzal · 9224

Poll

Is Downloadable Content beneficial or a Scam?

Beneficial
3 (11.1%)
Scam
1 (3.7%)
Depends on how it's done
22 (81.5%)
I don't know/care.
1 (3.7%)
I'm gonna play with the pig now!
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 26

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Protoman Blues

  • Green Lantern of Sector 1337
  • RPM Knight
  • ****
    • Posts: 31343
    • Gender: Male
  • Searching for Wanda
    • View Profile
Reply #25 on: January 04, 2011, 05:22:57 AM
Paying $20 for the complete game and not having to pay to unlock them later

So, just to be clear, you'd rather pay more money for no choice whatsoever than less money for multiple choices?



Offline Rin

  • The Hate Machine
  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 4146
    • Gender: Male
  • WORD
    • View Profile
Reply #26 on: January 04, 2011, 05:39:58 AM
So, just to be clear, you'd rather pay more money for no choice whatsoever than less money for multiple choices?
Not to be rude, but you seem to be missing his point... or at least what I think is his point.

Basically, I think he's trying to say, that it's better to pay more and not have to buy stuff which should be just a normal unlockable, because in the end, this is a shitty choice. Paying for something that should be normally included in the game, or not paying for it and living with the fact that you'll never get to experience to play as LOSER FORTE (for example) unless you give the developers more money.
Basically... it's like this:
DLC which is added some time after the game is released, and it's AN ACTUAL ADDITION to the game, like the downloadable BlazBlue CS chars (and the upcoming rebalance n'[parasitic bomb]) and then there's DLC which is what others already mentioned... A [tornado fang]ing UNLOCK CODE FOR SOMETHING WHICH IS ALREADY IN THE GODDAMN GAME AND SHOULD NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, BE A PAID DLC!

And I think I'm just repeating what others have already said, but just like Flame... I'll rather pay more money for a game, than BUY IT and then pay some more for dlc that's not even a real dlc.

I'm sleepy.



Offline Protoman Blues

  • Green Lantern of Sector 1337
  • RPM Knight
  • ****
    • Posts: 31343
    • Gender: Male
  • Searching for Wanda
    • View Profile
Reply #27 on: January 04, 2011, 06:01:34 AM
Not to be rude, but you seem to be missing his point... or at least what I think is his point.

Basically, I think he's trying to say, that it's better to pay more and not have to buy stuff which should be just a normal unlockable, because in the end, this is a shitty choice. Paying for something that should be normally included in the game, or not paying for it and living with the fact that you'll never get to experience to play as LOSER FORTE (for example) unless you give the developers more money.
Basically... it's like this:
DLC which is added some time after the game is released, and it's AN ACTUAL ADDITION to the game, like the downloadable BlazBlue CS chars (and the upcoming rebalance n'[parasitic bomb]) and then there's DLC which is what others already mentioned... A [tornado fang]ing UNLOCK CODE FOR SOMETHING WHICH IS ALREADY IN THE GODDAMN GAME AND SHOULD NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, BE A PAID DLC!

And I think I'm just repeating what others have already said, but just like Flame... I'll rather pay more money for a game, than BUY IT and then pay some more for dlc that's not even a real dlc.

I'm sleepy.

And what if someone doesn't want to play as Blues or Forte, or doesn't care about the extra levels and such? What you're telling me is that it's better to force people who don't care about the extra stuff to pay more for what they don't want, rather than charge less and actually give people a choice on whether or not you want to pay for this?



Offline Flame

  • The obsessive
  • RPM Soldier
  • ****
    • Posts: 16013
    • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Reply #28 on: January 04, 2011, 06:17:10 AM
Did we have a choice back before DLC? No? too bad then. If they made it into the game and sold it WITH the game, then it should be sold as PART of the game, and not have players pay just for something unlockable. DLC should ONLY be for something that Is not already in the game. For example- the upcoming DLC for Castlevania Lords of Shadow. there's 1 DLC pack that takes you back to the castle to explore more areas of it, and another that takes place right after the final boss, and which will supposedly shed some light on the epilogue.

DLC should NOT be used as a means to sell unfinished games, or to sell you things that are already on the disc/game.

Let me put it this way. I can see how from a selling standpoint it makes sense. you are selling the game for cheaper and then you can pay for the extra content if you want it. However, if that is the case, then do not include that content on the damn game you are selling, but make it, I dont know, ACTUAL DLC.

What I am against- Is not the choice, but including the content in a game, then having you have to pay to unlock it, rather than to legit download the content.

...When Larry the reploid accountant goes maverick of his own accord, he's certainly formidable during tax season, but he isn't going to provide X the challenge needed to make him grow as a warrior and reach his potential.


Offline Reaperoid

  • Redundant
  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 2315
  • d-don't fear the reaper
    • View Profile
Reply #29 on: January 04, 2011, 08:16:19 AM
So, just to be clear, you'd rather pay more money for no choice whatsoever than less money for multiple choices?
Think of it as the idea of a "Complete Collection", or a "Platinum" edition of the game.
You could either pay 1000 points for the game and... 1300~1400 points (i think?) for the DLC, or be able to get it later after it's cooled down for 2000 points or whatever. Still, you're saving only 300~400 points, but you're still saving points.

To a lesser extent, you could use the Borderlands Complete as an example. I don't particularly agree on using download vouchers to get the extra DLC, but the point is that it is still part of the reduced price of the game.

I guess all I can really say is it isn't exactly what I'd expect out of a $4.4M game

It doesn't even have mouth animations


Offline HokutoNoBen

  • We Are Living! Living in 90s...90s...90s...
  • RPM Soldier
  • ****
    • Posts: 1277
    • Gender: Male
  • Nyohohoho~!
    • View Profile
Reply #30 on: January 04, 2011, 08:23:19 AM
And what if someone doesn't want to play as Blues or Forte, or doesn't care about the extra levels and such? What you're telling me is that it's better to force people who don't care about the extra stuff to pay more for what they don't want, rather than charge less and actually give people a choice on whether or not you want to pay for this?

If the basic thing does more to boil down to "pay me now or pay me later", wouldn't it be better to just to do more to give everybody everything upfront, and make them truly feel like they got something worth their money in the exchange? As opposed to making their purchase feel "cheap" and "incomplete" when you tell them you still gotta buy stuff to get the "complete" goods on your disc/program/cart?

I mean, I would've thought this generation of gamers especially, with them likely growing up weaned on the likes of GTA3, would appreciate games that allow them to play a game any way they chose to. God only knows if they would even SEE half of what that those games had to offer in full, but it was all there, and it truly made their/their parents' 50-60 dollar investment worthwhile.

Honestly, with the way things are operating right now? By the time we likely tally up the total prices for these modern-day games and their DLC, we're basically right back to paying the 79.99-99.99 MSRP range we paid for games back in the early '90s (which, coincidentally, was the LAST time the dollar was weak to the yen, much like it is now). And truthfully speaking, I wouldn't mind paying for those prices again, if it meant I got a complete product as a result.



Offline Protoman Blues

  • Green Lantern of Sector 1337
  • RPM Knight
  • ****
    • Posts: 31343
    • Gender: Male
  • Searching for Wanda
    • View Profile
Reply #31 on: January 04, 2011, 11:50:44 AM
Did we have a choice back before DLC? No? too bad then. If they made it into the game and sold it WITH the game, then it should be sold as PART of the game, and not have players pay just for something unlockable. DLC should ONLY be for something that Is not already in the game. For example- the upcoming DLC for Castlevania Lords of Shadow. there's 1 DLC pack that takes you back to the castle to explore more areas of it, and another that takes place right after the final boss, and which will supposedly shed some light on the epilogue.

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, this Castlevania pack that was not in the game is just a bonus feature, like say Playable Forte. Now, because Playable Forte "made it into the game" and this LoS DLC pack didn't, that's the only thing that makes it okay when it comes to giving gamers a choice?

Quote
DLC should NOT be used as a means to sell unfinished games, or to sell you things that are already on the disc/game.

So DLC can only be used to sell you bonus features not included in the game, not bonus features included in the game?

Quote
Let me put it this way. I can see how from a selling standpoint it makes sense. you are selling the game for cheaper and then you can pay for the extra content if you want it. However, if that is the case, then do not include that content on the damn game you are selling, but make it, I dont know, ACTUAL DLC.

What I am against- Is not the choice, but including the content in a game, then having you have to pay to unlock it, rather than to legit download the content.

Honestly I don't really see a difference. Bonus content is bonus content, whether included with the game or not. I actually respect being given a choice whether or not to spend my money on it.

If the basic thing does more to boil down to "pay me now or pay me later", wouldn't it be better to just to do more to give everybody everything upfront, and make them truly feel like they got something worth their money in the exchange? As opposed to making their purchase feel "cheap" and "incomplete" when you tell them you still gotta buy stuff to get the "complete" goods on your disc/program/cart?

No, I don't think it makes much sense, especially in this day and age when the internet pretty much gives everybody everything upfront when it comes to information about a game usually a month or two before it comes out, like with the MM10 extra features. To once again use your Lexus analogy in regards to MM9 & MM10, it's like making people pay more for a GPS system when they might not want it. Sure, it can be part of the complete package, but to pay more for a complete package in which you won't use the add-ons is honestly just a waste of money, money you could spend on other things. Playable Blues & Playable Forte are GPS additions and do not make the car run. Neither do the extra stages or extra difficulty. Like I just told Flame, I actually respect sellers that give me, the consumer, a choice whether or not to purchase bonus features, whether included in the game or not.

If we go back to say MM9 vs. MMPU, for example, what if Capcom offered a $5-$10 cheaper MMPU game that did not include the Level Creator aspect of the game, and you never had any plans to use it at all? If someone never had any plans to use the feature, why make them pay $10 more for it? Just because it's "included in the game" and the game is "complete" with the feature said person is never going to use in the first place?

I mean, most people in here play a lot more games than I do, so I'm just judging by the few examples I have seen.



Offline Reaperoid

  • Redundant
  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 2315
  • d-don't fear the reaper
    • View Profile
Reply #32 on: January 04, 2011, 12:03:30 PM
If we go back to say MM9 vs. MMPU, for example, what if Capcom offered a $5-$10 cheaper MMPU game that did not include the Level Creator aspect of the game, and you never had any plans to use it at all? If someone never had any plans to use the feature, why make them pay $10 more for it? Just because it's "included in the game" and the game is "complete" with the feature said person is never going to use in the first place?
The feature is still inside the game regardless, and is available when the player finally wants to use it. Better to not need something to have it, than to need it and not have it.

Alas, it all comes down to how smart the developers make it, in terms of features which should be core to the game at release, and of features which can come later.
I liked that earlier Sonic example, but think about it: Sonic and Knuckles only came to be because they couldn't finish Sonic 3 in time, and with it's Virtual Console equivalent the other Sonic games, by modern standards, became Downloadable Content for S+K.

I guess all I can really say is it isn't exactly what I'd expect out of a $4.4M game

It doesn't even have mouth animations


Offline Flame

  • The obsessive
  • RPM Soldier
  • ****
    • Posts: 16013
    • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Reply #33 on: January 04, 2011, 03:48:49 PM
So, if I'm understanding you correctly, this Castlevania pack that was not in the game is just a bonus feature, like say Playable Forte. Now, because Playable Forte "made it into the game" and this LoS DLC pack didn't, that's the only thing that makes it okay when it comes to giving gamers a choice?
pretty much. If it is something that is already in the game when you buy it, then it should either be sold as part of the game, or not included at all, and sold separately like actual DLC.

Quote
So DLC can only be used to sell you bonus features not included in the game, not bonus features included in the game?
See above. Yes. [parasitic bomb] is called "DLC" for a reason. Its "downloading bonus content that was not in the original game, but which developers decided to add later." Not "buying an unlock code to play a part of the game that was already there to begin with"

Quote
Honestly I don't really see a difference. Bonus content is bonus content, whether included with the game or not. I actually respect being given a choice whether or not to spend my money on it.
Let me put it this way. Like the picture I posted earlier. the way say, LoS does it is sell you extra pie once you have finished the whole pie. The way MM9 and 10 do it, is sell you the whole pie, but once you have eaten half, if you want to touch the other half sitting in front of you, you have to pay up for pie that was given to you WITH the initial payment. If they are going to charge me for half my pie, then best they not give me the whole pie to begin with, and just give me the half and later offer me the option of actually buying and having anpther half broght to me.

Quote
No, I don't think it makes much sense, especially in this day and age when the internet pretty much gives everybody everything upfront when it comes to information about a game usually a month or two before it comes out, like with the MM10 extra features. To once again use your Lexus analogy in regards to MM9 & MM10, it's like making people pay more for a GPS system when they might not want it. Sure, it can be part of the complete package, but to pay more for a complete package in which you won't use the add-ons is honestly just a waste of money, money you could spend on other things. Playable Blues & Playable Forte are GPS additions and do not make the car run. Neither do the extra stages or extra difficulty. Like I just told Flame, I actually respect sellers that give me, the consumer, a choice whether or not to purchase bonus features, whether included in the game or not.
that is actually not quite the same comparison. Lexus does not include the GPS into the standard package but have you "pay to use it at all". it is an actual addition to the car- which is added IF you want it. Much like the way DLC should be. An addition that is only added IF you want. Notincluded with every verison of the package but "unlocked" by paying extra.

So actually, the car comparison works more in our favor than in yours.

Quote
If we go back to say MM9 vs. MMPU, for example, what if Capcom offered a $5-$10 cheaper MMPU game that did not include the Level Creator aspect of the game, and you never had any plans to use it at all? If someone never had any plans to use the feature, why make them pay $10 more for it? Just because it's "included in the game" and the game is "complete" with the feature said person is never going to use in the first place?
See now THAT is an idea. make a version of the game that does not have that feature at all. but that kind of version separation would be just silly for a downloadable game, and it would not quite be the same as selling you PU with the Level editor locked until you purchase an unlock for it.


...When Larry the reploid accountant goes maverick of his own accord, he's certainly formidable during tax season, but he isn't going to provide X the challenge needed to make him grow as a warrior and reach his potential.


Offline Protoman Blues

  • Green Lantern of Sector 1337
  • RPM Knight
  • ****
    • Posts: 31343
    • Gender: Male
  • Searching for Wanda
    • View Profile
Reply #34 on: January 04, 2011, 10:08:06 PM
The feature is still inside the game regardless, and is available when the player finally wants to use it. Better to not need something to have it, than to need it and not have it.

"Better to not need something to have it, than to need it and not have it." How does that have anything to do with MM9 or MM10? You do have it and you have the choice of buying it or not buying it at any point. "The feature is still inside the game regardless, and is available when the player finally wants to use it." Yes, this is exactly the case with MM9 & MM10. The bonus features are still inside the game and are available when the player wants to use it, but Capcom actually gives you an option NOT to buy it, to actually save your money. Just because it's already in the game, I really just don't see it as a bad thing. Especially for a $20 game which gives me more than that $50-$60 games of the past.

pretty much. If it is something that is already in the game when you buy it, then it should either be sold as part of the game, or not included at all, and sold separately like actual DLC.

Again, I disagree. Bonus content is bonus content.

Quote
See above. Yes. [parasitic bomb] is called "DLC" for a reason. Its "downloading bonus content that was not in the original game, but which developers decided to add later." Not "buying an unlock code to play a part of the game that was already there to begin with"

See above.

Quote
Let me put it this way. Like the picture I posted earlier. the way say, LoS does it is sell you extra pie once you have finished the whole pie. The way MM9 and 10 do it, is sell you the whole pie, but once you have eaten half, if you want to touch the other half sitting in front of you, you have to pay up for pie that was given to you WITH the initial payment. If they are going to charge me for half my pie, then best they not give me the whole pie to begin with, and just give me the half and later offer me the option of actually buying and having anpther half broght to me.

Oh boy.

Now clearly, this is where you and I differ as consumers, cause I like, nay LOVE, saving money, not to mention having choices. Let's use a Pizza Pie as an example. Say you buy a whole pie. It costs $14 and you know everything you're getting with it, you eat 2-3 slices of it, but after eating it you don't actually like the pie. Now you've paid full price for a pie for those 2-3 slices of this pie, and instead of saving the remaining 4-5 pieces of pie for later, you're going to throw them out and you've essentially wasted your money.

Now, say another Pizza Place comes along and offers you a choice; They tell you the pie is going to be $14, but they say you can pay half price now, with the option that if you like the pizza, you can pay the remaining cost for the remaining half. This actually gives you a chance to think about it. Did I like the pizza? Am I still hungry for more? You still know what you've ordered with that full pie, you know how much it's going to cost in the end, but now you actually have the chance to think about spending the money.

Judging by these discussions, the problem isn't that they're charging for bonus content or how they sell it to you, but that YOU SEE IT. You see it in the game, and you HAVE to have it no matter what, no matter if you're going to use it or not. You have to have it for the SOLE reason that it's there, and you'll pay whatever the cost to get it just so it can be complete. If the bonus content, and again only the bonus content, is not in the game it's okay, but if you see it there, then suddenly it becomes a problem, regardless of whether or not they are trying to possibly save you money.

MM9 and MM10 let you know fully well before hand everything you're getting with the game, thanks to the glory of the internet. So beforehand, you know that the complete package will be $19-$20 (I forget the exact price after everything). However, they give you a choice to pay $10 now for the full adventure 8-Bit MM aspect of the game, then pay the remaining $9-$10 later for the bonus content, in sections. Now, say Capcom added in an option to just let you pay the full $19-$20 up front and you automatically just get everything. Honestly, I would just do that as well, because I'd want & use everything with MM9 & MM10. HOWEVER, I like, in fact I REALLY LIKE the fact that Capcom actually gives the consumer a choice in the matter and gives them a chance to actually save their money, regardless of whether or not the content is included in the game or not. Should they include a "just buy it all now" option for MM11? Why not! I'd pay it all upfront and just get it over with. But I like and respect the fact that I am given a choice and if they just included that "just buy it all now" option, that's exactly what it would be. Another choice.

Quote
that is actually not quite the same comparison. Lexus does not include the GPS into the standard package but have you "pay to use it at all". it is an actual addition to the car- which is added IF you want it. Much like the way DLC should be. An addition that is only added IF you want. Notincluded with every verison of the package but "unlocked" by paying extra.

So actually, the car comparison works more in our favor than in yours.

Yes and no. You're right that it doesn't include the GPS in the standard package, however the screen that uses the GPS is more or less still there due to other functionality of it. But what if the GPS was there? What if the GPS in the car was already there and was literally a switch they just had to flip and flipping that switch would cost $100 more? Knowing full well that it was in there but you had no intention to use it, would you still pay that $100 more just to have it because it was there?

Quote
See now THAT is an idea. make a version of the game that does not have that feature at all. but that kind of version separation would be just silly for a downloadable game, and it would not quite be the same as selling you PU with the Level editor locked until you purchase an unlock for it.

Wait, what's the difference again? Just because it's downloadable vs. a UMD?



Offline Ninja Lou

  • Samurai/Ninja of RPM
  • Neo Arcadian
  • *
    • Posts: 1683
    • Gender: Male
  • Ninjas........Damn
    • View Profile
Reply #35 on: January 04, 2011, 11:37:33 PM
I see it this way. If I paid $60 for a disc I now own that disc and expect to have full access to everything on that disk since it is now my property. I can play it, I can burn it, I can sell it to someone else, hell I can give it to Natalie (my dog) and let her chew on it all night. I hate that they lock things on discs. Besides the money it feels like other people are doing what they want with my property and are giving me permission to play the game to a certain point. Also since it's also already on the disc I really don't see that as downloadable content. If you take DLC and just look at each word it means content that is downloaded. I know a few people mentioned that it is bonus content but it's not. Some people might see it as bonus content and if companies labeled as that then this would turn into an discussion of what should be considered bonus content. Companies decided to call it DLC and DLC means downloaded content. Content that is already on the disc isn't downloaded it's preprogrammed onto the disc and I hate when they call that DLC. I know they won't but if they want to charge us for that content then please just keep it off the disc and make it downloadable.
Basically I see it as we should not be charged extra for something we already own.


This post has been approved by Marle!


Offline Protoman Blues

  • Green Lantern of Sector 1337
  • RPM Knight
  • ****
    • Posts: 31343
    • Gender: Male
  • Searching for Wanda
    • View Profile
Reply #36 on: January 04, 2011, 11:55:56 PM
I see it this way. If I paid $60 for a disc I now own that disc and expect to have full access to everything on that disk since it is now my property. I can play it, I can burn it, I can sell it to someone else, hell I can give it to Natalie (my dog) and let her chew on it all night. I hate that they lock things on discs. Besides the money it feels like other people are doing what they want with my property and are giving me permission to play the game to a certain point. Also since it's also already on the disc I really don't see that as downloadable content. If you take DLC and just look at each word it means content that is downloaded. I know a few people mentioned that it is bonus content but it's not. Some people might see it as bonus content and if companies labeled as that then this would turn into an discussion of what should be considered bonus content. Companies decided to call it DLC and DLC means downloaded content. Content that is already on the disc isn't downloaded it's preprogrammed onto the disc and I hate when they call that DLC. I know they won't but if they want to charge us for that content then please just keep it off the disc and make it downloadable.
Basically I see it as we should not be charged extra for something we already own.

Fair enough. They shouldn't call it DLC, but maybe perhaps "OPC" or "Optional Content." If they called it that, would you have a real problem with it then?

Also, keep in mind my main argument deals with MM9 & MM10, those specific 2 games. I pretty much agree that if you pay a full $60 for a disc, then you should have access to everything on that disc. That would be like me buying the TRON Legacy CD soundtrack (one of the best soundtracks EVER I might add  8)) and not having access to every song on that disc, and then Disney asking me to pay an extra $1 for a song.

However, to counter that, I like what Amazon & iTunes does, in that it allows you to purchase individual songs AND gives you the option to buy the album whole. Like I mentioned before with MMPU, if they gave me a cheaper option in which to pay less for the full disc but be able to purchase an unlock code later on for the Level Editor, I'd have no problem with that, as long as it doesn't exceed the cost of the full disc with everything on it.




Offline Satoryu

  • Visually Appealing
  • RPM Purifier
  • ****
    • Posts: 4260
  • Whose franchise is dead?
    • View Profile
Reply #37 on: January 05, 2011, 12:09:18 AM
How many games actually have DLC that is already on the disc, anyway? I honestly can't think of many. Just Mega Man 9, Mega Man 10, and Resident Evil 5 for sure. Were Roll's costumes in Powered Up on the disc itself? For most of the games with DLC that I own (9 and 10 are the only exceptions), the DLC is added in later.


What happens in Vegas stays on Youtube. I also stream on Twitch from time to time.


Offline Ramzal

  • B-Class Hunter
  • *
    • Posts: 296
  • Don't sweat the technique.
    • View Profile
Reply #38 on: January 05, 2011, 12:13:40 AM
I see it this way. If I paid $60 for a disc I now own that disc and expect to have full access to everything on that disk since it is now my property. I can play it, I can burn it, I can sell it to someone else, hell I can give it to Natalie (my dog) and let her chew on it all night. I hate that they lock things on discs. Besides the money it feels like other people are doing what they want with my property and are giving me permission to play the game to a certain point. Also since it's also already on the disc I really don't see that as downloadable content. If you take DLC and just look at each word it means content that is downloaded. I know a few people mentioned that it is bonus content but it's not. Some people might see it as bonus content and if companies labeled as that then this would turn into an discussion of what should be considered bonus content. Companies decided to call it DLC and DLC means downloaded content. Content that is already on the disc isn't downloaded it's preprogrammed onto the disc and I hate when they call that DLC. I know they won't but if they want to charge us for that content then please just keep it off the disc and make it downloadable.
Basically I see it as we should not be charged extra for something we already own.

I can see your point, however one way or another you'd have to pay for it to be unlocked/downloaded. I can't say I know a lot about it, but maybe the fact that it's on the disk makes it easier to be accessed then to be downloaded. Maybe. Or even then, how many disc games actually do this? Most DLC I see is added much later after the game is made. But the point still stands that one way or another, you will be paying for it. The only other alternative is what you are suggesting...is for them to not lock information on the disk and allow a game to be benificial fully to the gamer. Which is good for us, but it's slightly selfish. It's a system that allows both ends to be satisfied. Companies make more income to develop these games, and we get to unlock more of the game to enjoy. I'd say it's fair trade, and I challange anyone to say that if they were in their shoes and position to make more income while still allowing gamers to enjoy their games further...that you would not do as they do. In reality it is even survival of the fittest from a business standpoint.

However, think about it like this. What if they were to do it your way and just increased the price of video games today, due to the information that was locked on the disc? Would you e happier paying 75 dollars for a few quest that you may not enjoy, or rather 60 to just not -have- to do so?



Offline Protoman Blues

  • Green Lantern of Sector 1337
  • RPM Knight
  • ****
    • Posts: 31343
    • Gender: Male
  • Searching for Wanda
    • View Profile
Reply #39 on: January 05, 2011, 12:45:26 AM
How many games actually have DLC that is already on the disc, anyway? I honestly can't think of many. Just Mega Man 9, Mega Man 10, and Resident Evil 5 for sure. Were Roll's costumes in Powered Up on the disc itself? For most of the games with DLC that I own (9 and 10 are the only exceptions), the DLC is added in later.

Just to clarify, I don't really consider MM9 & MM10 disc games. They are technically downloaded onto your system, and you know that after all is said and done, you'll be paying $20 to download everything. This is why when it comes to MM9 & MM10, I have no general problem with it.



Offline HokutoNoBen

  • We Are Living! Living in 90s...90s...90s...
  • RPM Soldier
  • ****
    • Posts: 1277
    • Gender: Male
  • Nyohohoho~!
    • View Profile
Reply #40 on: January 05, 2011, 01:03:30 AM
Fair enough. They shouldn't call it DLC, but maybe perhaps "OPC" or "Optional Content." If they called it that, would you have a real problem with it then?

It STILL really depends on how it's done. For example, buying the extra costumes for SF4, while a bit on the lame side, is indeed optional content. There's nothing about extra costumes that impacts on the game in any significant way that relates to the core of the game, on either a casual or meta-level. But hey, if you want to have your characters dolled up in apparel that Capcom offers extra, for whatever reason? Go nuts.

But let's say, Capcom wanted to do something different, where there were "OPC" special/super/ultra moves you could purchase in SF4. Now, we start getting into things that actually relate to the core of the game, affecting both casual and meta-level play alike. Headaches then ensue, because it then becomes a thing of what's "fair" or not, among other things.

This is why MvC3's character dlc operation stands to be a most interesting case for the fighting game community. Not only has something of this sort not been done before (BB:CS's instance is meant, in its own weird way, as a means to build up for CSII), it's going to be a thing that's likely going to make things messy for the months to come.

How many games actually have DLC that is already on the disc, anyway? I honestly can't think of many. Just Mega Man 9, Mega Man 10, and Resident Evil 5 for sure. Were Roll's costumes in Powered Up on the disc itself? For most of the games with DLC that I own (9 and 10 are the only exceptions), the DLC is added in later.

The original "uber-hack" for MMPU unlocked all of the content on the disc, if I remember correctly. This included all of Roll's outfits.

Other times that DLC has been used to scumbag ends? Well, there's always gems like this:

Quote
2K confirms on-disc DLC, tries to justify it
8:00 AM on 03.15.2010   |   Jim Sterling

Last week it was rumored that BioShock 2's DLC pack was not DLC at all, merely being a key that unlocked content already on the disc. 2K has since confirmed that this is the case, and has justified itself by saying it didn't want to split the user base. Wait, what?

"The way our engine and game structure works is that people need to have the exact same content for people to play together," wheedles 2K. "One of the challenges with post launch content for MP is that it can split the player base, and we want to avoid that whenever possible. For this content, creating the DLC package the way we did allowed for us to not split the player base -- so whether you purchase the new content or not, you can still play with your friends.

"I know some of you have strong beliefs about DLC, and I'm not here to sway your opinion or convince you to buy our stuff - if you like what we're offering, I hope you get it and enjoy it. If it's not your speed, enjoy BioShock 2 as we released it."

Forgive me, but that reeks of bullsh*t to me. I don't see how on-disc or DLC content would have any affect on the user base. I also can't wait to see 2K try to talk its way out of this statement when it runs out of on-disc content and starts making actual downloadable content, which you can damn well bet it'll start doing. Oh wait, it'll just pretend it never made this statement.

What a terrible excuse to justify blatant false advertising.

- http://www.destructoid.com/2k-confirms-on-disc-dlc-tries-to-justify-it-167007.phtml

So yeah, it's more common than one may think.

However, think about it like this. What if they were to do it your way and just increased the price of video games today, due to the information that was locked on the disc? Would you e happier paying 75 dollars for a few quest that you may not enjoy, or rather 60 to just not -have- to do so?

As I've said, I wouldn't have a problem with such. Like with any other luxury item, it's up to the end user to do their own research, and see if the product meets their wants and expectations. If so, you should be willing to pay the price. If not, pass it by.

This is one thing I do agree with Blues about. Thanks to the internet now-a-days, it's basically a thing where the astute consumer stands to know everything that a game stands to offer, as well as it what may not deliver on. Therefore, there really shouldn't be a need to put an extra "tax" on content in the first place, especially amongst the early adopters who practically are willing to sign their preorder receipts in blood. If you're not going to be an early adopter, you're likely going to be the sort that will wait to buy the game when it reduces in price or buy it used, any way.



Offline Ninja Lou

  • Samurai/Ninja of RPM
  • Neo Arcadian
  • *
    • Posts: 1683
    • Gender: Male
  • Ninjas........Damn
    • View Profile
Reply #41 on: January 05, 2011, 01:06:11 AM
How many games actually have DLC that is already on the disc, anyway? I honestly can't think of many. Just Mega Man 9, Mega Man 10, and Resident Evil 5 for sure. Were Roll's costumes in Powered Up on the disc itself? For most of the games with DLC that I own (9 and 10 are the only exceptions), the DLC is added in later.

Bioshock 2 did it. I forget wat it was exactly.


This post has been approved by Marle!


Offline Protoman Blues

  • Green Lantern of Sector 1337
  • RPM Knight
  • ****
    • Posts: 31343
    • Gender: Male
  • Searching for Wanda
    • View Profile
Reply #42 on: January 05, 2011, 01:50:35 AM
It STILL really depends on how it's done. For example, buying the extra costumes for SF4, while a bit on the lame side, is indeed optional content. There's nothing about extra costumes that impacts on the game in any significant way that relates to the core of the game, on either a casual or meta-level. But hey, if you want to have your characters dolled up in apparel that Capcom offers extra, for whatever reason? Go nuts.

But let's say, Capcom wanted to do something different, where there were "OPC" special/super/ultra moves you could purchase in SF4. Now, we start getting into things that actually relate to the core of the game, affecting both casual and meta-level play alike. Headaches then ensue, because it then becomes a thing of what's "fair" or not, among other things.

This is why MvC3's character dlc operation stands to be a most interesting case for the fighting game community. Not only has something of this sort not been done before (BB:CS's instance is meant, in its own weird way, as a means to build up for CSII), it's going to be a thing that's likely going to make things messy for the months to come.

Agreed. It does really depend on what they use the OPC content with. Like you said, there can be a fine line between "doesn't affect the core game" and "does affect the core game" that can be tricky. Like my argument with the MM9 & MM10, the OPC content does not affect the core game. Believe me, I'm in full belief that Blues should not only be playable without paying extra, but should star in his own game and eclipse Rock with his sexy omnishieldent shield. But I'm just plum Blues crazy! XD

Again, for the most part I agree with you. Character DLC operation is interesting and can definitely suck. I mean, sure I would never pay extra for Yoda in SCIV even though that empty slot is there and he may or may not be on the disc.  But if say I had to unlock Maxi, who was already included in the game's disc, then I'd be upset. LOL, I mean for [tornado fang] sake, I won't even play X7 because I have to unlock or get a save data file to play as X, so I can definitely see the concern! 

Quote
This is one thing I do agree with Blues about. Thanks to the internet now-a-days, it's basically a thing where the astute consumer stands to know everything that a game stands to offer, as well as it what may not deliver on. Therefore, there really shouldn't be a need to put an extra "tax" on content in the first place, especially amongst the early adopters who practically are willing to sign their preorder receipts in blood. If you're not going to be an early adopter, you're likely going to be the sort that will wait to buy the game when it reduces in price or buy it used, any way.

That's pretty much my point in a nutshell. If you know everything that's on the product and get an established cost on what you're purchasing, then there shouldn't really be an extra tax on the content in the first place. MM9 & MM10 let you know everything you were getting before the game come out, and that Bioshock 2 example Ben posted didn't. I think that's where the difference lies.



Offline Reaperoid

  • Redundant
  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 2315
  • d-don't fear the reaper
    • View Profile
Reply #43 on: January 05, 2011, 04:48:16 AM
If we go back to say MM9 vs. MMPU, for example, what if Capcom offered a $5-$10 cheaper MMPU game that did not include the Level Creator aspect of the game, and you never had any plans to use it at all? If someone never had any plans to use the feature, why make them pay $10 more for it? Just because it's "included in the game" and the game is "complete" with the feature said person is never going to use in the first place?
The feature is still inside the game regardless, and is available when the player finally wants to use it. Better to not need something to have it, than to need it and not have it.
"Better to not need something to have it, than to need it and not have it." How does that have anything to do with MM9 or MM10? You do have it and you have the choice of buying it or not buying it at any point. "The feature is still inside the game regardless, and is available when the player finally wants to use it." Yes, this is exactly the case with MM9 & MM10. The bonus features are still inside the game and are available when the player wants to use it, but Capcom actually gives you an option NOT to buy it, to actually save your money. Just because it's already in the game, I really just don't see it as a bad thing. Especially for a $20 game which gives me more than that $50-$60 games of the past.
I was actually replying towards your MMPU level editor 'dilemma'; the level editor is there if the player wishes to use it. If there are a number of features in the main package, they are all bound to be used eventually, regardless of whether DLC will change that amount of features. ie. you still have the awful, terrible analogy car, and how much you drive it is up to you.

LOL, I mean for [tornado fang] sake, I won't even play X7 because I have to unlock or get a save data file to play as X, so I can definitely see the concern!
That's nothing more than an excuse on your part, bordering on plain lazy with your role as the player.
Cause really, I will admit I am no good at X7, but I managed to unlock X.

I guess all I can really say is it isn't exactly what I'd expect out of a $4.4M game

It doesn't even have mouth animations


Offline Ninja Lou

  • Samurai/Ninja of RPM
  • Neo Arcadian
  • *
    • Posts: 1683
    • Gender: Male
  • Ninjas........Damn
    • View Profile
Reply #44 on: January 05, 2011, 05:06:18 AM
Roll in MMPU didn't bother me because it was free so I can't complain.

That's nothing more than an excuse on your part, bordering on plain lazy with your role as the player.

X7 unlock doesn't count as DLC or DLC unlocking so technically it doesn't relate to the DLC conversation, but I can understand that what PB is saying in regards to not playing it. I felt like it was a slap in the face having to unlock the main star of the game. It would be like having to unlock Mario in Super Mario Galaxy. That being said lets keep that to the X7 topic.


This post has been approved by Marle!


Offline Flame

  • The obsessive
  • RPM Soldier
  • ****
    • Posts: 16013
    • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Reply #45 on: January 05, 2011, 05:10:20 AM
They dont make you PAY to unlock X. he gets unlocked just like any NORMAL unlockable content. Well- not quite considering he gets unlocked no matter what you do and is only really locked for story reasons.

EDIT: Lou lived up to his name and Ninja'd in before me. XD

 At least they dont market it as "downloadable content" and then simply unlock it, which is what this whole issue is about. I dont mind the idea of having the extras optional like that- what bothers me, is the way it's done and marketed. It is already on the disc/in the game... and it is being falsely marketed as "DLC" which it is not.

but that has been covered up there already.

...When Larry the reploid accountant goes maverick of his own accord, he's certainly formidable during tax season, but he isn't going to provide X the challenge needed to make him grow as a warrior and reach his potential.


Aresian

  • Guest
Reply #46 on: January 05, 2011, 05:26:20 AM
X7 unlock doesn't count as DLC or DLC unlocking so technically it doesn't relate to the DLC conversation, but I can understand that what PB is saying in regards to not playing it. I felt like it was a slap in the face having to unlock the main star of the game. It would be like having to unlock Mario in Super Mario Galaxy. That being said lets keep that to the X7 topic.

I really have nothing of interest to add to the actual topic, since it's a bunch of bullocks anyway. However, this I do have something to rain on.

X never was the main character of X7, despite being the title character. (Given it has to be called Megaman X, it is in the X series.) The game was CLEARLY about Axl, thus Axl was the main character of said game. Story revolved around him and introduced him.



Offline Ninja Lou

  • Samurai/Ninja of RPM
  • Neo Arcadian
  • *
    • Posts: 1683
    • Gender: Male
  • Ninjas........Damn
    • View Profile
Reply #47 on: January 05, 2011, 05:44:10 AM
I really have nothing of interest to add to the actual topic, since it's a bunch of bullocks anyway. However, this I do have something to rain on.

X never was the main character of X7, despite being the title character. (Given it has to be called Megaman X, it is in the X series.) The game was CLEARLY about Axl, thus Axl was the main character of said game. Story revolved around him and introduced him.

 I can argue about having to unlock X in his own series but I really wanna keep this topic on track.


This post has been approved by Marle!


Offline Protoman Blues

  • Green Lantern of Sector 1337
  • RPM Knight
  • ****
    • Posts: 31343
    • Gender: Male
  • Searching for Wanda
    • View Profile
Reply #48 on: January 05, 2011, 06:44:43 AM
The feature is still inside the game regardless, and is available when the player finally wants to use it. Better to not need something to have it, than to need it and not have it.
 I was actually replying towards your MMPU level editor 'dilemma'; the level editor is there if the player wishes to use it. If there are a number of features in the main package, they are all bound to be used eventually, regardless of whether DLC will change that amount of features. ie. you still have the awful, terrible analogy car, and how much you drive it is up to you.

Yes, I know what you were replying too, and it wasn't a dilemma, but a hypothetical question. Also, you are so wrong. Just because features are included in the main package does not mean that they will eventually be used. I 100% guarantee that there are people out there who only play the online multiplayer of Halo: Reach and not the actual game, and visa versa. If Bungie actually offered just the multiplayer separate from the actual game and charged less for it, some people out there would definitely just get that, and visa versa for just the game & not the multiplayer.

Quote
That's nothing more than an excuse on your part, bordering on plain lazy with your role as the player.
Cause really, I will admit I am no good at X7, but I managed to unlock X.

LoL, like Lou said this can be saved for the X7 topic, but just to quickly answer, I was using that as a joke example of why I feel that paying to unlock characters in games is indeed wrong, like Ben said about fighting games. Me not playing X7 is indeed stubborn and stupid for the reason I stated, and I'm fully aware of that.




Offline Hypershell

  • needs DRAGONITE POWER!
  • Legendary Hero
  • *
    • Posts: 5271
    • Gender: Male
  • Steel in Zee Head
    • View Profile
    • Get equipped with Hyper's DA
Reply #49 on: January 06, 2011, 02:44:47 AM
To my knowledge no game at activation contracts you to purchase DLC before being allowed to clear the game, so using X who is UNAVOIDABLE as an example is, yeah, pretty irrelevant. :P

I kinda agree with Flame in that I don't think they ought to be charging for unlock codes.  It's just an excuse to advertise the game as being cheaper than it truly is, and it discourages the cheapskates from taking full advantage of the game's features and the development that went into them.

MMPU pissed me off only because of the bitchfest that came up when Roll's costumes were hacked (otherwise, it's free, who cares?).  That was positively shameful; if they were that important they should not have been written to the disc.  Game programming flags have been hacked, and doing so ruled in court to be legal, ever since the freaking NES.  Banning from Capcom's servers due to ToS violation is one thing, but the whole damn fanbase trying to censor the internet is quite another.

Also on DeviantArt, Rumble, DLive.tv, and the Fediverse (@freespeechextremist.com and @bae.st)