Activision announces a "Revolutionary new DLC-based shooter"

[Treblaine]

Hey kids, who wants a single well formed game when you can have a load of small parts that should make up a good game... in theory!

This will be incredibly hard to pull off as so much of what makes games good is the pacing and how it all fits together which is ultimately in the hands of the game director only here it seems a lot more like a Gary's Mod.

That is not going to challenge you as much as I suspect most people will be tempted just to play around than really have an adventurous and gratifying gameplay experience.

Mods are great to enhance an already great game, you can't expect mods to BE the game.

 

[SilentHunter7]

Okay, this isn't a real story, it's a satire, parodying what I see to be a ridiculous trend in gaming. I'll undo the white text. Though I thought it was way too anvilicious to be considered true, anyway. I guess I underestimated people's hatred of Activision. Apologies.

I thought it was bloody funny, so good job mate

Thanks. It's nice to know someone got it.

 

[Caimekaze]

I retract my previous statement.

Damn white text. I shall report you for your un-obvious lies!

Certainly lived up to your name, didn't you? I jest.


Well written piece of satire, Mr. Hunter7. I didn't fall for it though. But then, that was hardly your intention, was it?

 

[TheTygerfire]

Okay, so it's basically one of those "free" multiplayer games that offer premium content...but you HAVE to get the premium content....

Yeah, that's not revolutionary, that's Evony.

 

[IamQ]

Why would I want a game that robbs you of more than half the content and then wants you to pay them to get it back?

Is activision becoming a gaming mafia?

 

[TheLefty]

How is this revolutionary exactly? Bethesda has been doing this with Fallout 3 for a while now.

They sold us a game, then extra bits. This is selling us half a game then making us shell out for more stuff, like an ending.

Oh, so at least they're letting you know ahead of time that they're going to be screwing you. Still doesn't seem like a revolutionary step up from Fallout 3.

I'm one who lets people explain their bullshit before I start a fight. Please tell us why you believe that Fallout 3 was half a game.

 

[Georgeman]

Dude! Don't give ideas to Activision! They are already ripping us off with Guitar Hero and Call of Duty!

 

[Jandau]

Okay, this isn't a real story, it's a satire, parodying what I see to be a ridiculous trend in gaming. I'll undo the white text. Though I thought it was way too anvilicious to be considered true, anyway. I guess I underestimated people's hatred of Activision. Apologies.

It's not the hatred towards Activision, rather it's the overal cynicism towards the direction the industry as a whole is headed, and a good deal of that cynicism has a solid basis. Publishers seem to have interpreted DLC as an excuse to milk the game instead of using it as a platform to expand the game. Even though your OP was made up, I wouldn't be suprised if something like that showed up for real since that's where gaming seems to be headed. People jumped on this because it's quite beliveable, not because they hate Activision.

 

[sneak_copter]

Okay, this isn't a real story, it's a satire, parodying what I see to be a ridiculous trend in gaming. I'll undo the white text. Though I thought it was way too anvilicious to be considered true, anyway. I guess I underestimated people's hatred of Activision. Apologies.

GRR *shakes fist*

And I wanted this to be true. Sounded cool to me, were the parts of the game to a decent length and well-priced.

 

[quack35]

That was pretty convincing, I'm not gonna lie.

 

[Slash Dementia]

I can see companies doing this in the future. 'Tis sad.

 

[Sightless Wisdom]

Holy crap you managed to fool so many people, I commend you for your work. Anyway I wouldn't put it pasy a company like activision, the bastards.

 

[FinalHeart95]

I thought it was real at first, especially since it's Activision. This doesn't seem like something that is above them.

 

[shatnershaman]

You just made my day SilentHunter7 and I'll admit I was fooled til I read that it was coming out in 2012 (why announce something so early?).

I can't stand DLC, especially when I hear games like GH will have DLC at Launch. If you have the songs already done why not put it on the fricking disc! The only DLC I've paid for was Farcry 2 Fortunes pack and that was only because it was on sale for 240 MS points.

 

[SilentHunter7]

Oh please. The only thing "different" about your joke post from how many games work today is that the core engine doesn't come with its own content and that you ascribed a high price to the empty game. Given that we already know Activision is planning on testing higher prices in the UK, to say that you didn't think you needed it is either being disingenuous or simply naive -- the concept is actually fairly reasonable if a cheaper price point for the core was presented. So it's really not even good satire, as that would make a case for something that is quite unreasonable.

Paying 100 times for a full game IS quite unreasonable. Even if the core was free, would you honestly think that if they did this, you'd get the same amount of game for the same money? Microsoft has shown us that they're not above charging $10.00 USD for 3 multiplayer maps. Bethesda has shown us that they're not above charging $2.50 for a set of horse armor. Capcom has shown us that they're not above charging $5 to unlock a multiplayer mode that was already on the disk. EA has shown us that they're not above...well after charging over $100 for a handful of the Sims 3 objects, I don't think they're above anything, really. And you know what? This would be a cash cow. DLC has proven time and again that users won't mind paying $120 in $10 chunks as much as they would mind paying $80 in one go. Publishers taking a full 10-level game, and charging $10 a level, and calling it "Episodic" is NOT, any any way, shape, or form, reasonable.

Cheaply made, patchwork DLC is a plague, not a godsend.

 

[SilentHunter7]

Sales figures seem to prove you wrong. Apparantly, quite a lot of people think it is reasonable.. so reasonable that they put their money behind it.

I actually quite like that I can buy additional stuff for Oblivion at a lower price than a full sequel. Some might suggest that unreasonable is putting out a football game every single year where not much changes other than the team lineups.

Perhaps you've heard of Second Life? Some people actually make their living off of selling what is essentially DLC.. shirts, furniture, etc.

That you personally don't like something doesn't make it unreasonable. It just makes you into that guy on the corner with the sign declaring that something is evil. Sorry, I'm gonna laugh at you just like I do them -- from a safe distance, of course.

Hundreds of Thousands of people every day pay money for useless [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soPyiP-UjzI] infomercial [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUbWjIKxrrs] products [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4xw8dJkicI], it doesn't mean they're reasonable purchases.

It's one thing if the content were...you know, actual content. Like the Pitt Expansion for Fallout 3, or new songs for Rock Band. Hell, even multiplayer mappacks if they weren't $10 for a 3 goddamn maps.

It's an entirely different thing when developers start talking about DLC before the game is even out of beta, or when all you're paying for is a key to unlock content already on the disc, or when they release premium DLC on launch day. That's what really pisses me off, when the content should've been in the game you shelled out $60 for in the first place.

And no, I don't agree with EA's $60 roster updates every year, either.