DLC for Dummies
- Thread starter Shamus Young
- Start date
While every other thread on the wow forums being about the supposed end of wow or how ghostcrawler hates the OP's class/race/faction personally, I would agree with you and say those reviews seem more vitriolic. And what widens the gap between the two even more is that for wow you have to pay 15 bucks per month, which functions as a sort of implied agreement that you will keep getting updates/new content(within reason, anyways). Valve owes you nothing but the game you paid for. You are not "investing" in any other content. With DRM and DLC the way it is for other companies, why attack Valve? I see disagreeing with DLC altogether, but that can be done without slandering the entire project or being pejorative towards a developer who has a pretty decent track record of not screwing over fans, especially considering what other devs/publishers do.Grunt_Man11 said:
That being said, I enjoyed the article. It might have been a bit too insulting in some places, but the message is spot on.
Thank you.
I'm sorry, I really don't have much to say except "thank you," for putting out an opinion that actually makes sense to me. I'd even go so far as to say Portal 2 didn't have DLC, it just had a gimmick store.
I just honestly can't understand the waves of negativity. Regardless of your opinion on the game, Portal 2 was not a bad game by any stretch of the imagination in terms of technical, functionality and aesthetic aspects; it was "above average" at worst. There are so many more games deserving of hate than this one. It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth to imagine what the guys over at Valve must think when they see this response to an obviously lovingly crafted piece of work.
...Okay, I lied, I did have a fair bit to say.
I'm sorry, I really don't have much to say except "thank you," for putting out an opinion that actually makes sense to me. I'd even go so far as to say Portal 2 didn't have DLC, it just had a gimmick store.
I just honestly can't understand the waves of negativity. Regardless of your opinion on the game, Portal 2 was not a bad game by any stretch of the imagination in terms of technical, functionality and aesthetic aspects; it was "above average" at worst. There are so many more games deserving of hate than this one. It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth to imagine what the guys over at Valve must think when they see this response to an obviously lovingly crafted piece of work.
...Okay, I lied, I did have a fair bit to say.
They charge for those services not because they're expensive in themselves, but to deter people from changin servers/races/factions on a whim whenever they feel like it. Puttin a month cooldown or whatever wouldnt have the same desired effect as sayin you need to fork over cash for it.WaaghPowa said:
Edit - Gonna echo the "The hell did Blizzard do thats worse than Valve?" sentiment. Somehow mounts (that arent faster than anythin in game), and pets (which have no game impact at all) are somehow worse than t-shirts and hats is...kinda disingenuous. Sure rage at Activision all ya like about their DLC stuff, but tossin Blizzard in there just makes you look like you dont know what you're talkin about.
Your example is poor. Sitting is something that without ill be VERY uncomfortable theres a LOT of motivation to buy the chair, and i lose something if i dont. This is something that with or without, the experience is THE EXACT SAME. This is more akin to paying 2p for the doctor to call you "my lord" instead of sir. Its not even close to being comparable. You are blowing this far far larger than it is like everyone else.Sgt. Sykes said:
Two things:warfjm said:
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.
Well yes, it's understandable that they would put charges and cool downs in place to deter people, especially the kinds who are notorious for being massive dick heads, from changing all the time. I personally have only ever used their services for race/faction change for reasons such as the class I chose didn't have my preferred race at the time or I didn't want to abandon the alliance character so I transferred it horde to my guild. I just wish it didn't have to cost so much for honest people such as myself, but hey, make an exception for one person and everyone will be nagging for their exception.shintakie10 said:
I agree on every point except that DLC should be multiplayer-only. And I would add that developers shouldn't charge for "DLC" that's already on the disk.
Also, I've been asking this question for a week and still haven't gotten an answer, so I'll ask again: can console Portal 2 players play the user-generated maps made by PC players? (If it matters, I'm concerned with the the 360 version)
Also, I've been asking this question for a week and still haven't gotten an answer, so I'll ask again: can console Portal 2 players play the user-generated maps made by PC players? (If it matters, I'm concerned with the the 360 version)
Damn straight, I can't believe some of the crap people have been sprouting about this game! I've clocked in 13 hrs on it on one full playthrough of single and co-op and some fooling around chasing achievements and I've really enjoyed it. Not even got the slightest need to buy the gestures or cosmetics (what is this, robot dressup simulator? No? Then you're not missing out on the content, lol!) - especially as you can see the animations in the preview. (though tey're only "level 1" gestures... are there higher "levels" of gestures 0.0?)Shamus Young said:
All I want to see are some challenge maps like the original had. Then the game shall be complete
Based on Shamus' other Blizzard rants, like the fact that they split Starcraft II into three games instead of one. Yeah, I guess the next Starcraft II is supposed to be different from the last one since you play another race. But really, it's the same game, you're just given slightly different mechanics in the second one and need to buy it if you want the WHOLE story of Starcraft 2JerrytheBullfrog said:
The point is that, as Shamus says, Portal 2 handles DLC the best I've seen - it's basically like a "donate" function; a paint job or extra animation for a couple of bucks, and only if you go out of your way to find them. Compare that to your list. Now ask yourself why the one game that gets it right deserves all this hate compared to all those other day one DLC titles that lock away quests, characters etc etc.Traun said:
It doesn't, that's the whole point of the article. Many people ARE up against Portal 2 for no good reason. Shamus isn't defending DLC, he's defending a game that's being targeted for no good reason, and you seem to have missed that point with your post here.
But their reviews aren't subjective. The game is longer than they said it was. The price is in-line with other games. The DLC is inconsequential to every rational human. It was also a concentrated smear-campaign rather than a group of consumers 'coincidentally' sharing the same opinion. This opinion would never have come to light without zealous leadership by some head-honcho on 4Chan.Raiyan 1.0 said:
We need to live in a world where idiots can be called out for what they are, when appropriate.
THANK YOU! I can't stand how on any gaming news site, whenever there's an article related to TF2, it's the usual parade of 'I hate this game now because there's a way to buy things I could get in-game for free, as well as items that don't impact gameplay at all!' Portal 2 doesn't deserve it either; the DLC's a bit of window dressing with no impact on gameplay at all. Get over it, people.
I honestly can not understand this either.
Portal 2 is NOT short. It took me probably ~7 hours, and I played the first one to death (doing all the advanced maps and challenges and such). I still haven't tried Co-op yet. I expect there will also be some Advanced Chambers and Challenges to be released at some point, as is Valve's way.
All of this combined means I'll probably end up putting more hours in to this than I would most other AAA titles.
And you know what I feel about the DLC?
Nothing. I clicked on the 'Robot Enrichment' thing on the main menu, thought "Well that's neat I guess" then suddenly realised I could be using that time to play more of the god damn game. If someone wants to pay £2 to make his robot look prettier, that's fine by me. Just as I don't care if people want to pay for beauty treatments, but the point is, I don't rally against beauty salons for offering me their services.
Portal 2 is NOT short. It took me probably ~7 hours, and I played the first one to death (doing all the advanced maps and challenges and such). I still haven't tried Co-op yet. I expect there will also be some Advanced Chambers and Challenges to be released at some point, as is Valve's way.
All of this combined means I'll probably end up putting more hours in to this than I would most other AAA titles.
And you know what I feel about the DLC?
Nothing. I clicked on the 'Robot Enrichment' thing on the main menu, thought "Well that's neat I guess" then suddenly realised I could be using that time to play more of the god damn game. If someone wants to pay £2 to make his robot look prettier, that's fine by me. Just as I don't care if people want to pay for beauty treatments, but the point is, I don't rally against beauty salons for offering me their services.
