Bulletstorm DLC Is On The Way - UPDATED

[Rusty Bucket]

Does anyone understand game development? Like, at all? The game will have gone gold 2-3 months before release, which means it gets sent off for certification, printing and distribution. The content on disk is locked at that point, nothing else can be added at all. What do you want the developer to spend that time doing? They aren't just going to sit around with their thumbs up their arse.

Did anyone even read the fucking article? The DLC isn't out on day 1 you idiots, it's due out in spring. They will have been working on it for a good 5 months at that point, and there was no possible way to get it on the disk without delaying release by months.

 

[Catalyst6]

And so it begins, the parade of mediocre DLCs that should be included in the base game.

Oh, but of course. We must milk the consumer for what he is worth, after all!

Although it might work like Alan Wake, where the DLC wasn't quite that; it was DLC, yes, but you got the codes for it if you bought the game new. So in reality, it was "included on the disk", but only if you bought it new. Which, in the world of aftermarket sales, I can understand somewhat.

Of course, if you bought the game used (like I did) or bought the game when it first launched (take that, you stupid supporting bastards) then you got to shell out 30$ for the rest of the content. Whoopee.

 

[awesomeClaw]

Meh, i might get it. Probably not, though.

EDIT:"Does anyone understand game development? Like, at all? The game will have gone gold 2-3 months before release, which means it gets sent off for certification, printing and distribution. The content on disk is locked at that point, nothing else can be added at all. What do you want the developer to spend that time doing? They aren't just going to sit around with their thumbs up their arse.

Did anyone even read the fucking article? The DLC isn't out on day 1 you idiots, it's due out in spring. They will have been working on it for a good 5 months at that point, and there was no possible way to get it on the disk without delaying release by months."

This may be true, but if so, they should INFORM their consumers. They can´t just expect us to know everything about game development like that.

 

[Andy Chalk]

When they're announcing it the week of launch, that means they've already been working on it for a little while.

They haven't even announced a release date for it. How do you know how long they've been working on it?

 

[Andy Chalk]

No,because I already payed for the game and I don't want to pay for it again.

Uhh, you're not. You're paying for the DLC - if you so choose.

 

[StriderShinryu]

Geez, this really ticks me off! That garbage sounds like the sort of thing someone who already really enjoys the game would probably consider buying in a couple of months when their interest in the base game has waned!

 

[Andy Chalk]

You see, that's exactly the kind of behavior that leads to DLC. Publishers think that the other million Andy Chalks like you will go 'hey, that was NEVER part of the actual game and that OBVIOUSLY was meant to be an add-on for people who wish to pay for it!' and so they tear a few levels and guns out of the original game and label it as DLC.

I have two thoughts about that statement. One, it's incredibly paranoid. Two, if you don't feel the original game is worth the price of admission, don't pay it. Or if you don't feel that the DLC adds enough to justify the cost, don't buy it.

And I'm still waiting to hear how a multi-month span between announcement and release equates to "they obviously started working on it while the game was still in development." So-called "on-disc DLC" like that seen in the Dead Space 2 fiasco is one thing but announcing plans for new content that will come out two or three months down the road is something else entirely.

 

[Andy Chalk]

But in this case, you have no idea when development began on the DLC. And do you really think it takes seven or eight months for a professional development team to make five maps?

For that matter, do you expect every member of the dev team to be working on the game right up to the very day the game goes gold? Because I'm pretty sure that's not how it works.

You're also complaining about DLC that's an "epilogue," yet we don't have any idea how the Gun Sonata pack fits into the story. It really makes me wonder what the real issue is here.

 

[Wolfy4226]

You people do know how much planning actually goes into making a game AND DLC, right? Just because they are announcing it on Day 1 doesn't mean it's actually done. Hell, when they announced Bulletstorm itself it wasn't even done, and no game is. This is just to build up hype for it, that's all.

 

[GonzoGamer]

When they're announcing it the week of launch, that means they've already been working on it for a little while.

They haven't even announced a release date for it. How do you know how long they've been working on it?

I don't think it was on this site but I heard April.
Either way, I'm annoyed by these full priced short games that have dlc announced (and they aren't being vague, the details seem pretty fleshed out) the week of launch. Or worse those (Capcom) games that have the dlc on the launch disc and you have to pay to unlock it.
If they're going to keep doing that crap, they need to make the price for the disc cheaper but I know that aint gonna happen because there are enough suckers out there willing to pay $60 for a two hour game.
Taken to an absurd level (though it has been discussed by publishers) they could start charging for demos and just sell the rest of the game as dlc packs.

 

[Gralian]

One more reason not to purchase Bulletstorm.

Note that this isn't a boycott on my part, but if i'm really on the fence about something, things like Day 1 DLC (sorry, but announcing DLC on day 1 is just as bad in my book) is enough to dissuade me from picking up the game entirely. Not to mention i hear EA is doing that online pass thing for Bulletstorm, which is atrocious considering the laughable multiplayer. As i understand it, there isn't even a deathmatch mode. It's just online co-op. It's not even like you can play the entire campaign online with a buddy. What is it? Horde, but on a smaller scale and in first person view? I could understand using an online pass if the online was actually worth it - looking at Need For Speed: Most Wanted, here, since racing against people / friends online in cop chases and the like is a pretty good selling point for the game that will increase its longevity. I know i got fun out of it, anyway. But for something like this, or even Dead Space, online passes for totally lackluster online components just feels like a joke and more of a 'we're doing this to make a statement' which is not just an affront, but a slap in the face to the consumer.