Dead Space 2 DLC Packs Unlocked on PC

[icyneesan]

EA's got some explainin' to do

 

[Bad Cluster]

I'm just glad I didn't finish Hardcore for that sweet handgun before I found out that it is bugged on PC and will not unlock. Later I learned about similar issue with Elite suits and I was very upset.
"What did you expect? This is EA" - This is what most of my friends said after I told them. Sad, but they are right.
And we are still waiting for a patch!

Issues like this with a big budget Visceral/EA had for Dead Space 2 are inexcusable.
Take Amnesia: Dark Descent game for example, tiny, less experienced team and tiny budget. Yet they made the game with amazing atmosphere and great sound quality, maybe not as visually detailed but that's a minor issue for a game.
The game costs about six times less than Dead Space 2 but provides just as much thrills if not more, virtually bug free and when you get it you know you are getting the whole deal without any "exclusive" DLC bullshit. They even put commentaries in and hidden bonus content with that.
That's a kick in the gut no less.

 

[Mr. Socky]

so... why is this paid-for-dlc, something we should have to buy if it's already been included?

Are the people who use this savefile now pirates?

would you consider somebody accessing content that is in the game they purchased a pirate? i certainly wouldn't.

What makes this even more entertaining is that you can't actually BUY the stuff on the PC, period. The only way to get it is through dubiously legal means. To be honest, if EA doesn't start giving free DLC to PC users to make up for all the terrible glitches our version has (that they are taking way too long to patch), I'm gonna be royally pissed off in the first place.

I tried it and to my disapointment, it worked like a charm,
Why would EA lock away that content, if it was a compatibility or logistical problem i could just wave it off. But including it not only on the disk of the consoles but ALSO on the Disk/EADownload/SteamDownload of the PC version just blows my mind...

Also i dont really get why they would try to sell the sh*t in the first place,
It is just a few suits and weapons with different colours textures and maybe a 5-15% boost to certain stats here and there.

They should just unlock it for the PC version anyways it just doesnt make sense...

I'd be happy with just a patch. They haven't even done that, let alone either free DLC to make up for the crap, or even promises of paid DLC support. EA is really dropping the ball on this one.

 

[Piflik]

Yeah...I really hate that...I can understand doing that with preorder exclusives, but 'DLC' that you have to pay extra for? If it is on the disc, than it was done during the work that I have paid for with my purchase of the game, so I really don't want to pay again to unlock it...I would classify such kind of 'marketing' as fraud...

 

[RobCoxxy]

Well if the extra content is meant to cost $5 extra then ...theyre stealing it right? Unless EA shouldnt have been selling it in the first place.

New ammunition for retarded morality discussions detected.
If you order a pizza and the box comes with a locked case in which there are fries, the key costs 5 bucks but you manage to open the box and eat the fries without paying for the key anyway, you're a thief?
Trick question, the real question is, who in their right mind put that case with the fries readily accessible into the box of pizza in the first place?

Tbh it's DLC - downloadable content.

If it is content unlocks, then that's what it is - not DLC - therefor EA are lying to consumers = lawsuit.

DLC is content you pay for and download.
Not content already in the released game that's locked away that you need to pay for. That's release content. That we're being screwed for.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

so... why is this paid-for-dlc, something we should have to buy if it's already been included?

Are the people who use this savefile now pirates?

In the most technical way, the answer is yes. Given that a software license gives one the right to use software in a very specific way, accessing content (even if it was already there) that could have later been sold could be called piracy.

But then, a more reasonable take on the subject is to say that it is not piracy because the data was already there. Given that there was no offer to sell valid access to the content it could not be classified as piracy. A person who actually unlocked the content could easily have been in violation of their license agreement (they generally include stern warnings against reverse engineering or modifying the product in any way shape or form) but people who simply use the save are well into the gray area if not in the clear.

So, my answer is "technically yes but reasonably no".

 

[Andy Chalk]

I'm not appending it to the story since it's really just a "nothing to say," but EA said in a follow-up comment that despite the situation, it still has nothing to say about DLC for the PC. So as an educated guess I'd say they'll have to do something fairly quickly, but officially at this point, nothing has changed.

 

[Jack Macaque]

I can't verify its safety and if you end up nuking your entire system into oblivion, it's all on you.

LOL that's a hell of a save file if it can do that.

Things like this really make me sad sometimes, believe this happened with RE5 no?

 

[VincentX3]

If its on the disk, its not downloadable content. First the crap with Bioshock 2, now this. Just unbelievable.

You forgot Resident Evil 5 on PC, pay extra for a mode that's ALREADY on the disk.

OT: Not to necro this thread, but it's been 10days+ and still no news from EA.
/sad pc gamer

 

[Andy Chalk]

To avoid confusion: this save game unlocks the suit-and-weapon packs DLC, not the Severed DLC. Not that it necessarily matters in the long run since they were both announced as console-exclusive, but they are separate issues.

 

[lotanerve]

Sadly, there is always someone/some company that is going to perverse the ingenuity of DLC

As I remember it, the idea of DLC was the created to give the game more content to make the game appealing even after the initial 90-day release. I'm not sure what study I read, but after 60 days, it was noticed that the initial appeal of a new game wore off. By 90 days, these games were rarely played as the gamer had moved on to the next new appealing game. Since expansions were an enormous undertaking that usually saw itself released 9-12 months after the game, publishers needed something to hold the gamers interest until then...something more, but less than an expansion. That's where DLC was invented.

It was a win-win,
-For the developers-who weren't taxed on resources that they could give some thought into little things like armor/weapons/missions while still being able to concentrate on the upcoming expansion
-For the publishers-who could still make money off these small extras while still keeping the gamer's interest for the expansion
-For the gamer- (there maybe some argument here) who could see the game as replayable with new features that didn't break the wallet.

Keep in mind DLC was originated to be sold as an afterthought. Though some features were originated during the development of the game, they couldn't be finalized because of budget constraints, or development deadline.

My problem with EA is that they perverse this ideal of DLC by pressuring developers to have a scheduled release of DLC content to the point of even if content is finished and ready to be included with the game's release, they will hold it just to pad their profit margin even more. Sadly, this is becoming the standard.

DLC needs to go back to the form it once was, and there needs to be accountability and oversight to insure that the system is not gamed (pun intended) by the publishers.

 

[Art Axiv]

If I could, I would not buy anything EA if possible. Sadly, its much like a choice between Linux and Windows - where on Linux you can't run Windows games, and if you don't buy EA's games, you won't play them (not talking about pirating them). DRM and DLC can indeed die in a fire, though I would pay for REAL EXPANSIONS..

Sadly, there is always someone/some company that is going to perverse the ingenuity of DLC

As I remember it, the idea of DLC was the created to give the game more content to make the game appealing even after the initial 90-day release. I'm not sure what study I read, but after 60 days, it was noticed that the initial appeal of a new game wore off. By 90 days, these games were rarely played as the gamer had moved on to the next new appealing game. Since expansions were an enormous undertaking that usually saw itself released 9-12 months after the game, publishers needed something to hold the gamers interest until then...something more, but less than an expansion. That's where DLC was invented.

It was a win-win,
-For the developers-who weren't taxed on resources that they could give some thought into little things like armor/weapons/missions while still being able to concentrate on the upcoming expansion
-For the publishers-who could still make money off these small extras while still keeping the gamer's interest for the expansion
-For the gamer- (there maybe some argument here) who could see the game as replayable with new features that didn't break the wallet.

Keep in mind DLC was originated to be sold as an afterthought. Though some features were originated during the development of the game, they couldn't be finalized because of budget constraints, or development deadline.

My problem with EA is that they perverse this ideal of DLC by pressuring developers to have a scheduled release of DLC content to the point of even if content if finished and ready to be included with the game's release, they will hold it just to pad their profit margin even more. Sadly, this is becoming the standard.

DLC needs to go back to the form it once was, and there need to be accountability and oversight to insure that the system is not gamed (pun intended) by the publishers.

Fantastic post. +1 I whole-heartedly agree.