DLC for Dummies

[tehroc]

Now to be fair, I have not played "Portal 2".

This sentence takes away any credit away from the previous wall of text paragraph. If you haven't played it, then why bother writing an essay on the subject? Stick to the DLC argument not the game itself.

Two things:

For starters your wrong, since we're talking about how the game is received overall, and metacritic ratings and such at this point. What any one person thinks is more or less irrelevent in the scope of that point. I was pointing out that even if it's a wonderful game, it's getting bombed, and that takes a LOT of people, far more than can be mustered by trolls who go after just about any game out there.


Secondly, the attitude of "if you haven't played it, you can't have an opinion" is one of the most dangerous ones out there right now, and at the root of a lot of problems. Even if I was talking about the game content, as opposed to reception, the opinion of someone who didn't buy the game should be pretty well valued for the reasons on why they didn't buy it, as opposed to attacked.

Right now a big problem with the gaming industry is that when someone buys a game, and doesn't like it, the industry already has their money. With digital downloads, or purchused PC software, you can't decide "gee, this sucks" and bring it back, your stuck with it. It's quite a racket when you get down to it, and probably screws dissatistifed, legitimate purchusers worse than the pirates they are trying to crack down on screw the companies. Even with console games, they can be tricky to return. While Gamestop tends to be decent with people returning new games for full value within a couple of days, there are retail places that will give people major issues with returning any kind of opened software, including console games. Some game shops also force you to return any opened product as a "trade in" meaning you lose half or more of the value of the game just to try it and see if you like it.

Like it or not, with the price of games, the economy, and the leap of faith required, playing a game should hardly be a requirement to have an opinion. Especially seeing as by buying a game, even if you hate it, the industry gets to consider you a satisfied customer and you get put into that entire "we've sold X number of copies" speil.

To be honest even with the pre-order incentives, I'm rapidly becoming far less willing to go right out and buy games on release, since it's becoming a bigger and bigger racket.

In the case of this discussion though, understand that I have said nothing bad about Portal 2 itself, other than it's not being well received. The user ratings speak for themselves. The point is that all this talk about "metabombing" and how it's all over "trolls upset about day #1 DLC" are just excuses from those not wanting to face reality. Deserved or not, and loved by some or not, "Portal 2" is not being received as well as it has sold.

I think the refusal to face reality is largely because by acknowleging that what happened here and with "Dragon Age 2", it means the industry is going to have to change some things it really doesn't want to, since it will mean cutting down on their profit margins in one way or another. It's better for a lot of bean counters to try and deny reality and say "it's those blasted trolls" rather than accept that "damn, I guess our audience is smarter and has better standards than we assumed". Give it time though, I suspect this is a trend and it will get hammered into skulls eventually.... or it will contribute to an industry collapse.

I think it should be taken as a warning sign when two beloved companies like this get hammered the same way, right in a row. If a darling like Valve can suffer in the user ratings like that, it's important to walk away from it with the right lesson learned.

This guy should be getting his own weekly editorial.

 

[Ldude893]

I think I just heard the sound of win from this post.

Yes, the people who criticize Portal 2 solely because of its literally-unnoticable DLC are idiots. Portal 2 excelled in almost all areas; the DLC was almost nothing.

 

[Jagji56]

Out of context

Small Comment

AWESOME WORDS OF AWESOMENESS

This guy should be getting his own weekly editorial.

Yes, get this guy his own blog. The more opinions the better! XD

 

[Luke5515]

I'll be honest, I thought the campaign was a little short, but it was really good so I'll forgive it. I mean really good.
But they've been doing this in tf2 for quite some time. Since the engineer update if memory serves me. No one cared. It's all hats there too, and sure people didn't really like it, but there was nowhere near this much outrage. Just don't buy it, and shut up.

 

[RA92]

So a professional writer like Shamus goes out and uses expletives against the subjective reviews of a certain group of consumers who are well within their rights to voice their opinions - gah, poor attempt at trolling on my part, good job Shamus!

Not really he just pointed out the massive gaping holes in their entitled little tantrums, as it is his right to and indeed makes a living out of. As he has covered bad DLC, the DLC the ruins games, encourages piracy and milks the customer, I can see why he's a bit annoyed that the DLC gamers take a stand against its the least harmful of the lot. It doesn't speak well for a general understanding of the issue

Good sir, you missed a critical part of my post:

'...poor attempt at trolling on my part...'

And if the smiley indicates anything further, it's that I was kidding.

If I'm to quote Longsite, Valve is a company that has released 2 additional free campaigns for L4D, 3 additional free campaigns for L4D2, about six million free content updates for TF2, a complete free overhaul of everything that was wrong with CS:S, an entirely free game in the shape of Alien Swarm, free copies of Portal on Steam and free PC version of Portal 2 for the PS3 and free engine updates to every single Source game since 2004 to build upon 6 years' worth of technological advancement. They have never, ever charged for any of it, and they've made no suggestion that they ever intend to do so. Do you know what they have charged for? In-game merchandise. And if those in-game merchandises that are not integral to the game experience go to fund all those free stuff even a bit, I don't know what we have to complain about.

Some people don't deserve Valve.

In my opinion, Valve should be very happy with the whole fiasco. The only 'flaw' people are bitching about is not integral to the game itself, so they I guess they pretty much made a flawless game, if you know I mean. ^_-

 

[Iscin]

For all those who badly rated Portal 2 on metacritic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yytbDZrw1jc

 

[Earaldor Xerron]

First of all, I think the user rewievs on Metacritic are as accurate as converting a classic piece presented by a complete orchestra to 2 or 3 different sounds. About every tenth review has anything to do with opjectivity; the others rate the game to either 1-3 or 8-10, based mainly on one thing or maybe not even that, only because the game "sucked"/"owned". Dragon Age II hater flooded the site and wrote terrible reviews about a not so terrible game, COD:BO wasn't that terrible as to deserve a rating of 4.2 either.

Second, while I don't really like the idea of buying cosmetics for money either, as long as it's not a requirement for enjoying the game to it's fullest, I don't care. If there are people who actually want to spend their money on this, then I'm happy for them. Everyone else should be, since if this prooves to be a succesful form of DLC then maybe we can say goodbye to the other forms of it, mentioned in the article. So I must agree with Sheamus almost entirely.

 

[Dauntless]

If you're on a crusade against DLC, start with EA. Start with BioWare. Start with Blizzard.

Wait wait. "Start with Blizzard"? The only thing they've offered for any of their games that could be considered DLC is vanity pets and mounts, which fall under the same category as the Portal 2 DLC. What DLC did Blizzard put out that broke one of the rules of what DLC shouldn't do?

Otherwise I agree with your article, 100%. As I stated on the Portal 2 forum though, if people didn't have the purchasable DLC items to cry about, they'd have found something else to throw a fit over. Some people are simply happy only when they're complaining.

You said everything I wanted to say. I totally agree. Blizzard is doing DLC the right way, and even better. A lot of the income they get from the DLC (vanity pets/mounts) go to charity. How awesome is that?

Also, Sgt. Sykes is, as defined in this article, an idiot. Don't listen to him.

 

[fundayz]

It's cosmetic items behind a wall of code you have to pay to remove, and it doesn't make me feel that great about the developers who are responsible for that decision.

If you couldn't obtain these items in any way except paying for them then you would have a point, but you can remove that "wall" by just playing the game as well. The DLC just allows you to circumvent the required achievement/trophies to unlock said items.

Every sort of day-one DLC, is stupid. Games are expensive as it is, asking more money just shows that the current state of gaming is unproductive and the publishers are greedy. And yes, Valve is a full-blown publisher, not a small indie developing house like people want to believe.

Damn them companies and their money making right? Who are they to FORCE us to buy their game and FORCE us to buy their DLC?

Oh wait...

Seriously grow up. Game developers don't owe you squat and if they wanna charge you 10 bucks for a digital hat they can. If you feel it's a rip off then act like a regular person and just don't buy their product instead of whining like an entitled 10 year old.

Only company that makes good DLC is Rockstar which fails every one of your 4 bullet points. At least the huge publishers give you something worth your dollars, not just skins that we used to get for free off places like fileplanet or by beating the game.

You do realize that you can unlock the majority of DLC-bought items through gameplay as well right?

 

[tehroc]

You do realize that you can unlock the majority of DLC-bought items through gameplay as well right?

You do realize this thread isn't about Portal 2.

 

[beema]

Yeah the backlash against Portal has to be one of the stupidest things I've EVER seen in the gaming community. Did you happen to check out the Steam forums, Shamus? Within hours of the game's release, there were 30+ PAGES, not threads but pages of threads, of bullshit. Some of the threads were "legit" (people asking stupid questions or being stuck), but many of them were straight up bitching. I feel like Valve fans in general are bitchy little shits more than others for some reason, despite the fact that Valve treats gamers better than any other developer/publisher in the history of time.

About the game-length stuff:

The game amounts to a linear series of room-escape puzzles, with the co-op and single player campaigns both functioning in the exact same way. Because of this, Portal 2 has absolutely zero replay value (since solving the same puzzle twice isn?t much fun).

Sadly, this is a huge detractor from the multiplayer. Generally multiplayer aspects of a game can greatly increase its longevity and have you coming back to play it again and again. But since it is just co-op through several puzzles that never change, if you go through it one time with a friend, there is no incentive to ever play again.

This kind of sucks for anyone who has friends who already played through the co-op, but they themselves have not yet played it, as they will be hard pressed to find a buddy to go through it with. After playing through it once, the magic is gone.

This is especially evident when surveying my Steam friends list for the past week. On the first 2 days of release, everyone on it was playing Portal 2, and all of them blew through the game (both campaigns) in one or two sittings. Now, only a few more days since it released, they have already moved on to other games.

It?s for these reasons that selling it as its own entity and fully priced $60 game feels strange, and perhaps wrong, and my guess as to why people are bitching about it being a ripoff despite the game itself being very good.

nershe Horible

 

[fundayz]

You do realize that you can unlock the majority of DLC-bought items through gameplay as well right?

You do realize this thread isn't about Portal 2.

You do realize you were talking about Portal 2 right?

"At least the huge publishers give you something worth your dollars, not just skins that we used to get for free off places like fileplanet or by beating the game"

Sounds an awful lot like you are referring to Portal 2 and games like it that sell vanity items...

 

[Frozengale]

DLC haters, please oh please oh please start with Bioware. Their DLC is getting on my nerves. Ever since someone like Shale was DLC I've weeped about DLC. DLC is for putting in new stories and new ideas into a game after it's been published. It's for putting in those final touches of a game the the publisher didn't allow you time to do. It's not meant to take holes out of a game and then sell them back to you.

That being said I have no problem with Portal 2 Day one DLC. It's purely aesthetic. I for one LOVE aesthetics. A game where I can customize my character and make them look awesome is something that I can't get enough of. But I mean I know that extra aesthetics don't really have any hold on how good a game is. Portal 2 shouldn't suffer for a few extra aesthetics that you have to buy.

You do realize Shale was free right? So was the Cerberus network fluff like Zaieed and Firewalker for Mass Effect 2. So were the map updates for Bad Company 2. None of which were included on the disc.

Nope Shale expansion is 15 bucks if you didn't have a promotional code. I had to pay for it, my dad had to pay for it, my friend had to pay for it. Instead of just putting it in the game like normal they screw over some of their player base and make us pay 15 bucks for it. And then of course Wardens Keep was 7 bucks. Seriously? That's the only way I can store half the crap that you guys through on me and I'm going to have to pay 7 bucks for it?

 

[Slangeveld]

"Reads article"

Amen!

No seriously, I have seen some of the replies and I couldn't believe it. People are actually complaining about something just so they are, and they don't even realise it. D:

 

[unacomn]

Clap Clap Clap Clap

It still works.

Good read, good point. It also reinforces the age old notion that Metacritic should be set on fire and beaten with a stick.

 

[Dana22]

Blizzard is doing DLC the right way, and even better. A lot of the income they get from the DLC (vanity pets/mounts) go to charity. How awesome is that?

Thats very bad example, since that was a very money-grubbing move. If you do charity, you give 100% of income, like say Riot Games did (League of Legends).

 

[JET1971]

excelent article Shamus, as usual. I myself have an issue with the whole DLC being paid for unsless its like HL2 ep1 and ep2. kinda against what you were saying it should be multplayer only. HL2 episodes were what DLC shouldve been from the start and nothing more. continuation to the story. another part that DLC should be if not continuation is added areas to explore in the game world. one or the other is good for adding new content thats not someting that affects the SP as far as story, or plot goes. HL2 again and imagine "Lambda Locator X2" where theres double the lambda locations and many other new hidden places to explore.thats 2 good uses for DLC and 1 other could be alternative skins, different weapons, vehicles, and mini games added to the whole SP.

things for online play DLC that cause more problems are DLC gametypes, new weapons/tools, new abilities, and new maps. new maps and gametypes go together with the same problem they cause, and thats non DLC players will start getting kicked from servers. servers will get the new maps and gametypes added into the rotation so you join a server with some friends, half the friends have the DLC and half do not. they play a couple of the stock maps and the server rolls to a DLC one. half the friends just got kicked from the server. been there done that myself, i was pissed that i could no longer play with my friends unless i bought DLC i didnt want or flat out couldnt afford.

new weapons/tools, and abilities go together for problems. and the problem is balance. DLC weapons are almost always better than the stock ones or they wouldnt sell. advantage using them. new tools helps you get things done or locate enemies faster. clear advantage. adding new abilities will ofcourse give you another advantage. and we all know how well balanced they make character classes when they ship games... as in not very well. giving advantages to DLC players makes the game unfair to non DLC.

so DLC should be single player only to enhance whats there but not change plot story and expansion packs only for multiplayer such as BFBC2 added the vietnam expansion as DLC.