DLC for Dummies

[qbanknight]

Thank you calling these little damn ingrates on their BS Shamus; Blizzard, BioWare, and EA have committed far worse in terms of DLC. They are just picking on Valve because they didn't get Portal 2 a whole DAY earlier as WAS NOT promised by the Potato Sack ARG

 

[anian]

Meh, don't sweat it, you can't please everyone, most of the time it's hard to even please a minority of the net.

I think DLC in Team fortress (where more or less, buying stuff just gets you something quicker and doesn't affect the gameplay that much), in Portal2 it's also pretty unobtrusive.
In any case it's better than selling you a quest in DA Origins or simlar examples.

Portal1 wasn't very long, but it was almost free and Portal2 didn't start of at 60 euros price either, plus it adds a multiplayer and tools that'll make more levels pretty soon I guess. And yes, the sad fact is that it still is longer (and has more personality) than some AAA titles.

To be honest though I didn't buy it...yet, but I will when the price drops a tad (personal situation though, not that it's not worth it).

 

[mcnally86]

1. They're cosmetic items.
2. Some of them are unlocked simply by playing the game.
3. Some of them are unlocked if you own them in TF2.

Oh yes, this is horrible horrible dlc. I can't believe anyone would rage against VALVE regarding DLC. You know, the company that made Team Fortress 2, a game that has more than doubled in game size in free updates? Or even the L4D games, which have both gotten a couple new campaigns? Even Counterstrike got a number of new maps and upgrades free back in the day.

Compare this to Black Ops, which is selling a multiplayer map pack for $15.

Shamus, once again you are the voice of reason, and I salute you.

Saying TF2 doubled in size for free is like saying Maple Story never made a profit. They have been making cash back on the micros.

 

[Dreamtank]

Thanks Shamus. Keep up the good work. This was well written and very clear and concise. I hope more read this post. Portal sets a very good example to us all, especially in its diversity and thats why so many are interested, not just the media storm because the first one was a gem.

 

[Waaghpowa]

I was with you until this paragraph. Hate it for being longer than shooters? Hate it for not being brown? Hate it for being playful? Hate it if you are racist? Hate it because we don't "deserve" anything so good from our god-like Valve masters? That they would feel pity on the lowly muck covered mass of sub-human garbage we all know deep in our hearts we truly are.

Like I said I agree they are dumb, but you you Shamus, are much worse. Be a critic. Do your job. Critique the game's actual flaws and give the stupid people real issues to discuss. Don't stand on a soapbox and yell how much smarter you are then everyone else. I am saddened by this paragraph. I can understand why you wrote it, I cannot understand why you published it.

Believe it or not, there are people who hate anything that looks even remotely unique and would rather play the same CoD clone crap all the time, I believe that's what he refers to.

 

[warfjm]

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.

 

[Booze Zombie]

I didn't even know there was DLC for this game, though I was aware that some guys were review bombing this game despite its solid design.

I agree with you, S'. Not because you're popular, not because you're always right, not because if I hate on you I may risk my account, I just agree with what you said in this very article at this moment in time.
I must clarify, lest someone hops onto this comment and yells "BUT HE SAID-".

 

[AngryMongoose]

I was somewhat... I don't know, offended? disappointed? something like that, when I saw the micro-transactions in portal. Maybe it was just disappointment that I wouldn't be able to pimp out my science-bots after seeing the option available (Pretty-Princess-Dressup is one of my favourite games). I've always felt that cosmetic changes are the best way to handle micro-transactions, but it all seems wrong here.
First, it is essentially a single player campaign. There's a coop section, but that only comes in at a few hours, and I can't really see why anyone would want to pay £2 per item for cosmetic changes that will only last that short time, and only be seen by one other person. Second, it's a full price game. You talk about DLC here, but such minor cosmetic changes go under the heading of micro transactions, and in a game I've already paid for, it feels weird that they would try to charge more for what's already there (Yes, I do hate project 10 dollar). They don't really add much to the game, they don't require much development time on Valves part, so I am slightly offended that I'm expected to pay for them.

I could probably condense what I said there into two words: "Horse-Armour".

*GIGANTIC SNIP!*

Screw it. Ignore what I said. This guys points were far more erudite, intelligible, and literate than mine.

Just to comment on the time played, I talked to my roommate this morning and he said he finished it in about 4 and a half hours his first play through, 2nd play through in about 2 and a half. And I've been hearing from various other people on my steam friends list that they've done it in 4-5.
I personally have yet to get a crack at the game because my copy is somewhere in the mail...

Unless they're cheating or exploiting the game systems in some way, there is no possible way you, or anyone, can beat Portal 2 in 2 and a half hours. Even if you know exactly what to do all the time, it will still take at least 5 hours.

If they're going by what the Steam timer says, they should know that the Steam timer is broken. I once played New Vegas from day(about 5PM) to night(was 10 when I got off), and Steam says I played it for 2 hours.

Steam Timer is broken, it is not a good way to tell how long you've played a game. Best way to do that is to not the time when you start, and note it when you stop. Then just use simple maths to figure out the difference.

But Portal 2 is not 4 hours long. There is no possible way, except with cheats/exploits, to beat the game in under 5 hours.

Challenge accepted. Well, it would be if I weren't so lazy.

But no, seriously, it's a dialogue heavy puzzle-platformer. You can easily cut 2/3rds off the average playtime without employing speed runner tactics just by making a quick completion your main goal. I completed it in 5 hours (main campaign) going at a leisurely stroll, getting all the alternative dialogue from Wheatly, looking at any interesting setting pieces, and generally stalling.

 

[Woodsey]

Just to comment on the time played, I talked to my roommate this morning and he said he finished it in about 4 and a half hours his first play through, 2nd play through in about 2 and a half. And I've been hearing from various other people on my steam friends list that they've done it in 4-5.
I personally have yet to get a crack at the game because my copy is somewhere in the mail...

Is your friend just quoting from his Steam timer? Because the thing has a tendency to not catch up with itself for a while, or not at all. There really is no way in hell he finished it in 2 1/2 hours. 4 1/2 on a second playthrough? Pushing it (A LOT), but possibly. 2 1/2, no way.

It took me 6 1/2 hours, and a couple of friends a tad longer, and all the reviewers I have seen have said 6 at least. Rock Paper Shotgun even played the game again and couldn't get it in 4 hours, I believe.

 

[rayen020]

Experienced Points: DLC for Dummies

Shamus skewers the Portal 2 DLC backlash

Read Full Article

You can hate Portal 2 if you like. Hate it for being only about 50% longer than the average shooter. Hate it for having fantastical pseudo-science setting instead of a gritty, ultra-brown motif. Hate it for being playful and witty instead of macho and serious. Hate it for having puzzles instead of murder as its core mechanic. Hate it because protagonist Chell is just a boring analytical Latina woman instead of an awesome white Ex-Navy SEAL dude with short brown hair. Hate it because it allows console and PC gamers to play together instead of maintaining the firm platform segregation that's made the gaming community such a joy these last few decades. Hate it for experimenting with new ideas instead of sticking to what already works and has been done elsewhere. Hate it because you're an indignant little rage-bot and you know deep down you don't deserve something this good. But don't hate Portal 2 for actually moving against the prevailing DLC trends. If you're on a crusade against DLC, start with EA. Start with BioWare. Start with Blizzard.

I was with you until this paragraph. Hate it for being longer than shooters? Hate it for not being brown? Hate it for being playful? Hate it if you are racist? Hate it because we don't "deserve" anything so good from our god-like Valve masters? That they would feel pity on the lowly muck covered mass of sub-human garbage we all know deep in our hearts we truly are.

Like I said I agree they are dumb, but you you Shamus, are much worse. Be a critic. Do your job. Critique the game's actual flaws and give the stupid people real issues to discuss. Don't stand on a soapbox and yell how much smarter you are then everyone else. I am saddened by this paragraph. I can understand why you wrote it, I cannot understand why you published it.

this isn't a critique it's an opinion column. And your missing the point of the paragraph. He's saying there are other reasons to hate it and the DLC isn't it. He's saying this is one of the best FPSs on the market, he's saying that this is a clever creative game that is different from every other shooter on the market. and these people are bashing it over the DLC which isn't intrusive or gamebreaking. and where does he say he's smarter than everyone else? he's saying the people who railed against the DLC are idiots. and if you railed against the DLC on metacritic well good for you.

 

[chronobreak]

First, we unlocked items in game for free by beating it or doing other tasks. Then, they charged us for meaningless cosmetic alterations. Then, they began charging for these things the first day of game release.

By the time they were charging for DLC that significantly altered the gaming experience, I had no money left in my wallet, and all I wanted to do was enjoy a full gaming experience for the full price of the game I bought.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

but team fortress 2 has shop items that are entirely overpowered and the "store" has broken/killed the entire game.

Can I just ask which of the items are OP? Ones that can't be picked up or traded? Coz I'm 110% sure that it won't matter which item you have when I'm sticking my level 1 knife in your back.

 

[trollnystan]

I heart you so much right now Shamus. In a non-creepy non-stalker way of course...

*hides telescopic lens*

 

[Irridium]

Challenge accepted. Well, it would be if I weren't so lazy.

But no, seriously, it's a dialogue heavy puzzle-platformer. You can easily cut 2/3rds off the average playtime without employing speed runner tactics just but making a quick completion your main goal. I completed it in 5 hours (main campaign) going at a leisurely stroll, getting all the alternative dialogue from Wheatly, looking at any interesting setting pieces, and generally stalling.

And I did the same things, and it took me 7 hours to beat. I know this because I started at 4PM or so, and when I stopped it was 11PM(give or take a few minutes).

And Steam says I beat it in 4 hours.

 

[PurplePlatypus]

I can see why people might be slightly miffed, if just because of the pricing of the DLC but I can?t understand why it?s such a big deal. It?s simply not even close to the worst use of DLC. If anything, this is an example of how DLC should be done for the most part. Tucked in a corner where to can take it or leave it and it affects pretty much nothing.

 

[mountainfire]

1. They're cosmetic items.
2. Some of them are unlocked simply by playing the game.
3. Some of them are unlocked if you own them in TF2.

Oh yes, this is horrible horrible dlc. I can't believe anyone would rage against VALVE regarding DLC. You know, the company that made Team Fortress 2, a game that has more than doubled in game size in free updates? Or even the L4D games, which have both gotten a couple new campaigns? Even Counterstrike got a number of new maps and upgrades free back in the day.

Compare this to Black Ops, which is selling a multiplayer map pack for $15.

Shamus, once again you are the voice of reason, and I salute you.

Saying TF2 doubled in size for free is like saying Maple Story never made a profit. They have been making cash back on the micros.

Much of the expansion of TF2 occurred before hats, believe it or not. TF2 continued to sell copies enough for the TF2 team to keep working. Hats now just help continue that cause four years after release. I'm okay with that. Considering I paid around $10 for over 500 hours, a hat or two seems fair. Plus, almost every item has the potential to drop in game, for free.

 

[Scars Unseen]

Good article. On the other hand, zero bombing in general is pure idiocy. The only possible excuse I can think of for a zero review is if you got game stopping bugs that the developer didn't plan to fix (e.g. I could see some people zero bombing Alpha Protocol if they hit the install bug). Other than that, or possibly a violently malfunctioning sex toy, I can't see any game actually deserving a 0 rating. And I've played some pretty bad games in my time.

So pretty much... yeah, these guys are even worse than the day 1 Dragon Age 2 zero bombers because at least those guys had a valid complaint(well some of their complaints were valid, anyway. some were outright fabrications).

 

[tomtom94]

I await Valve's response to all this controversy.

It should be worth seeing.