DLC for Dummies
- Thread starter Shamus Young
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Huh, this is an interesting read. I haven't played the game yet (waiting for it to drop in price. Although I'm sure it's great, I don't feel the need to play it right now, and really can't justify spending $110 on a video game at this point) but it's interesting to see that people are raging on it with regard to something that (to me) isn't really all that important.
Sing it Shamus!
This is one of the best articles I have read on The Escapist, and I loved that slant that you've frankly had it with some of these people, as frankly, I feel the same.
I agree that this is the best use of DLC I have ever seen. Valve tested how much people love microtransactions for cosmetic gear in TF2, and the haters were there as well. They always struck me as people who were ultimately jealous that they didn't have the disposable income to spend on something like hats.
So boohoo all you want haters; you didn't pay for this cosmetic content - it's not on the disc. Also, despite your vitrol, we all know you'll be first in line to buy the next Valve product, so stop your crying.
This is one of the best articles I have read on The Escapist, and I loved that slant that you've frankly had it with some of these people, as frankly, I feel the same.
I agree that this is the best use of DLC I have ever seen. Valve tested how much people love microtransactions for cosmetic gear in TF2, and the haters were there as well. They always struck me as people who were ultimately jealous that they didn't have the disposable income to spend on something like hats.
So boohoo all you want haters; you didn't pay for this cosmetic content - it's not on the disc. Also, despite your vitrol, we all know you'll be first in line to buy the next Valve product, so stop your crying.
Decent article up until your last paragraph. Then you start insulting people that have real grievances against Portal 2, instead of just those against the dlc. The game is really short still for a full priced release. First time through was just over 4 hours for me, barely. I then spent 2.5 hours doing coop with a friend. And after that I have done about 6 farming all the achieves. It's a good game, but I shouldn't be left with absolutely nothing left to do in the game in the same week as release. Yes 12.5 hours is a nice amount of time for a game, but I normally expect that to be the time for the single/coop time, and then have the achievement farming add more time.
I was about to raise that point too, but I realised he didn't say 'any dissenters'. He just said he would have to deal with idiots.mcnally86 said:
Still, I don't see anything wrong with this DLC. They've been doing exactly the same thing in TF2 for ages now, and I thought everyone had got that out of their systems.
While the column did tail off a little in the readability stakes, on this issue I'm going to fully support Shamus' stance, and even his attitude towards it, because he pretty much nailed it. Well, him and Jim Sterling:
That aside, there are a couple reasons I am genuinely unconcerned by the existence of micro-transaction based hats and clothes in Portal 2. One is the fact that they add nothing - zero - to the game itself, nor does their initial absence take anything away from it. Like many others, I didn't even know the shop was there until I clicked the mysterious button, after finishing my first playthrough (7.1 hours, if we're counting, and I've played a lot of Portal in my time).
Another is that I spend an awful lot of time playing real Valve DLC, and it's all been free. Every single bit. I've played all the new L4D and L4D2 campaigns, I've played all the new and community maps in TF2, I've played Alien Swarm to bits. All of these genuinely expanded upon and improved existing games (or in the case of Alien Swarm, was a goddamn game), and all of them came with an affordably round price tag. When I consider that there are big-time developers out there that gleefully charge the price of half a full game for 'map packs', and that people gleefully pay for them without getting their panties in a twist, it seems a little petty to complain about an unintrusive and totally cosmetic DLC store from a developer that always gives away the good stuff for free. The "how long before they start charging for everything" and "I don't like the direction the company is going in" arguments really, really rile me up, because they show that actually, you're completely ignoring the company's entire history towards supporting its fans, and choosing to only pick up on what they've chosen to make money off (optional and inconsequential cosmetics) rather than what they've given away for free (games).
But what really, really annoys me about the sort of people that do complain about this sort of stuff - and it's entirely right to call them idiots, because that is what they are - is that, as Shamus intimated right at the end, they do not know what it is they're taking a stand over. There exists today a certain breed of PC gamer who simply cannot help but vomit bituminous bile at the mere mention of a few choice phrases - 'console port', 'day one DLC' and 'less freedom' being the choice few we're hearing most at the moment. These are not people who are making informed decisions before commenting on a product. They are not informed gamers who have made a personal judgement on a game they've played. They are not the bearers of constructive criticism. They are idiots, who are downvoting a good game that most of them claim to have enjoyed (as if to try to maintain a semblance of integrity, and it's this that really gives the game away) simply because they've latched onto la mot du jour or enjoy the fleeting sense of empowerment that comes with railing against the establishment, and that most of us get over by about 17.
Granted, Portal 2 has paid optional extras from release. However, nothing about the words "day" "one" and "DLC" makes the concept intrinsically bad; it's a concept that is frowned upon because of how it's been handled in the past. It's a concept that is disliked because gamers do not enjoy paying for a game, only to find out that the most interesting quests / missions / people are trapped behind a paywall, and have been there since before the game was released. This is understandably a state of affairs worth complaining about, but it is simply not the case with Portal 2. DLC on day one is not in itself a bad thing; DLC that makes every single player feel that they need to buy it to get the full game experience is. Anyone that dislikes the idea of paying for customisations for co-op robots can gleefully overlook the fact that the Portal 2 store even exists, because the game goes on just as happily with it.
Let us be clear; the Portal 2 store is not day one DLC in the traditional sense. It offers silly, cosmetic customisation options that have absolutely no bearing on the game whatsoever. There is a word for this, and it's been around a lot longer than video games: merchandising. When you complain about the Robot Enrichment centre you're complaining about nothing more than merchandising. You're complaining about the band t-shirt you're wearing, and the film posters on your wall.
The console port argument is a whole new ballgame, but let us summarise: Portal 2 is not a console port. It was developed simultaneously for multiple platforms, but, unlike other games that have received that unfortunate moniker, really shines on the PC. Crank the graphics up to full and have a go. My gaming PC is nothing particularly special but it certainly out-specs an Xbox 360, and yet I had to turn the effects detail down because it struggled at times to keep up. It'll need a further couple of upgrades before it's genuinely capable of displaying the lighting and fluid effects in all their spectacular glory while maintaining a playable framerate. I can only assume that the same effects had to be subtly toned down to make them playable on either console, so it's the consoles that are suffering for trying to run a PC port, not the other way around. Even the loading screens - bane of so many a complainer - have far more to do with the perhaps archaic architecture of the Source engine (closed and statically lightmapped BSP maps, a concept that has changed little since the original Doom) than any console-targeted design decision. On modern, speedy PCs they appear for less than five seconds, and they're specifically there to draw attention to the way the Aperture Labs changed during the 50s, 60s and 70s, and onwards into the future. They're a deliberate design decision that has nothing to do with consolitis. Just because we're used to a certain kind of loading screen in certain well-known console games doesn't mean console games invented them, or that they're never seen in PC games. Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas both had very similar and deliberately-themed loading screens whenever a new part of the world was loaded, but the screaming hordes remained silent.
Taking this point to a more general level: anyone who screams 'console port' like they're pointing out a genetic abomination has no idea what they're talking about, and precious little clue about game development. It hurts to see them spew their bile all over the nice, clean internets. If you're going to argue a point, work out what it is first. If you don't like day one DLC, what is it you don't like about it? What have console ports done to enrage you so? If these abstract concepts have actually ruined your game, then rage away, and may the gods heed your call. If the only thing that has actually offended you is that some games have handled them poorly, then take a deep breath, think really hard about what you're about to type and then, once you've realised you're being an idiot, go back and enjoy the game you were happily about to downvote for a reason that doesn't exist.
Dear god yes, with twinkly cuboid bells on. You know, I'm fairly sure I've paid well less than £100 for Valve games in my entire lifetime. For that money, I have spent 984 hours playing them - in the last year alone. For every single pound sterling I have given to Valve, they have given me a good ten hours of playtime, just in the last twelve months. To my mind, they are entitled to day one DLC, if it is really even worth calling it that. They could charge me by the hour to play their games from now on and it would still work out a better deal than I've got from any other developer out there.Jim Sterling said:
That aside, there are a couple reasons I am genuinely unconcerned by the existence of micro-transaction based hats and clothes in Portal 2. One is the fact that they add nothing - zero - to the game itself, nor does their initial absence take anything away from it. Like many others, I didn't even know the shop was there until I clicked the mysterious button, after finishing my first playthrough (7.1 hours, if we're counting, and I've played a lot of Portal in my time).
Another is that I spend an awful lot of time playing real Valve DLC, and it's all been free. Every single bit. I've played all the new L4D and L4D2 campaigns, I've played all the new and community maps in TF2, I've played Alien Swarm to bits. All of these genuinely expanded upon and improved existing games (or in the case of Alien Swarm, was a goddamn game), and all of them came with an affordably round price tag. When I consider that there are big-time developers out there that gleefully charge the price of half a full game for 'map packs', and that people gleefully pay for them without getting their panties in a twist, it seems a little petty to complain about an unintrusive and totally cosmetic DLC store from a developer that always gives away the good stuff for free. The "how long before they start charging for everything" and "I don't like the direction the company is going in" arguments really, really rile me up, because they show that actually, you're completely ignoring the company's entire history towards supporting its fans, and choosing to only pick up on what they've chosen to make money off (optional and inconsequential cosmetics) rather than what they've given away for free (games).
But what really, really annoys me about the sort of people that do complain about this sort of stuff - and it's entirely right to call them idiots, because that is what they are - is that, as Shamus intimated right at the end, they do not know what it is they're taking a stand over. There exists today a certain breed of PC gamer who simply cannot help but vomit bituminous bile at the mere mention of a few choice phrases - 'console port', 'day one DLC' and 'less freedom' being the choice few we're hearing most at the moment. These are not people who are making informed decisions before commenting on a product. They are not informed gamers who have made a personal judgement on a game they've played. They are not the bearers of constructive criticism. They are idiots, who are downvoting a good game that most of them claim to have enjoyed (as if to try to maintain a semblance of integrity, and it's this that really gives the game away) simply because they've latched onto la mot du jour or enjoy the fleeting sense of empowerment that comes with railing against the establishment, and that most of us get over by about 17.
Granted, Portal 2 has paid optional extras from release. However, nothing about the words "day" "one" and "DLC" makes the concept intrinsically bad; it's a concept that is frowned upon because of how it's been handled in the past. It's a concept that is disliked because gamers do not enjoy paying for a game, only to find out that the most interesting quests / missions / people are trapped behind a paywall, and have been there since before the game was released. This is understandably a state of affairs worth complaining about, but it is simply not the case with Portal 2. DLC on day one is not in itself a bad thing; DLC that makes every single player feel that they need to buy it to get the full game experience is. Anyone that dislikes the idea of paying for customisations for co-op robots can gleefully overlook the fact that the Portal 2 store even exists, because the game goes on just as happily with it.
Let us be clear; the Portal 2 store is not day one DLC in the traditional sense. It offers silly, cosmetic customisation options that have absolutely no bearing on the game whatsoever. There is a word for this, and it's been around a lot longer than video games: merchandising. When you complain about the Robot Enrichment centre you're complaining about nothing more than merchandising. You're complaining about the band t-shirt you're wearing, and the film posters on your wall.
The console port argument is a whole new ballgame, but let us summarise: Portal 2 is not a console port. It was developed simultaneously for multiple platforms, but, unlike other games that have received that unfortunate moniker, really shines on the PC. Crank the graphics up to full and have a go. My gaming PC is nothing particularly special but it certainly out-specs an Xbox 360, and yet I had to turn the effects detail down because it struggled at times to keep up. It'll need a further couple of upgrades before it's genuinely capable of displaying the lighting and fluid effects in all their spectacular glory while maintaining a playable framerate. I can only assume that the same effects had to be subtly toned down to make them playable on either console, so it's the consoles that are suffering for trying to run a PC port, not the other way around. Even the loading screens - bane of so many a complainer - have far more to do with the perhaps archaic architecture of the Source engine (closed and statically lightmapped BSP maps, a concept that has changed little since the original Doom) than any console-targeted design decision. On modern, speedy PCs they appear for less than five seconds, and they're specifically there to draw attention to the way the Aperture Labs changed during the 50s, 60s and 70s, and onwards into the future. They're a deliberate design decision that has nothing to do with consolitis. Just because we're used to a certain kind of loading screen in certain well-known console games doesn't mean console games invented them, or that they're never seen in PC games. Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas both had very similar and deliberately-themed loading screens whenever a new part of the world was loaded, but the screaming hordes remained silent.
Taking this point to a more general level: anyone who screams 'console port' like they're pointing out a genetic abomination has no idea what they're talking about, and precious little clue about game development. It hurts to see them spew their bile all over the nice, clean internets. If you're going to argue a point, work out what it is first. If you don't like day one DLC, what is it you don't like about it? What have console ports done to enrage you so? If these abstract concepts have actually ruined your game, then rage away, and may the gods heed your call. If the only thing that has actually offended you is that some games have handled them poorly, then take a deep breath, think really hard about what you're about to type and then, once you've realised you're being an idiot, go back and enjoy the game you were happily about to downvote for a reason that doesn't exist.
The only thing I slightly disagree with is #2. Single player DLC in itself is fine; it's just that pairing it with server check DRM/authentication makes it shit. Although I obviously agree with "Being unable to reach the internet should not impact a single-player game."
Other than that, I give a standing ovation to this article. This is what I want to say to every single person whining about the co-op costume items. Except I want to add one thing: the game is a first person game, so that means that unless you place your portals just right, you won't ever even SEE what your robot is or is not wearing. And if you can't even see it, you are absolutely not losing anything by not having it. And I really doubt the guy you're playing with who can see your character model feels like he's missing a piece of the game because your character isn't wearing a hat with a mini companion cube on top.
Oh, one last thing:
Other than that, I give a standing ovation to this article. This is what I want to say to every single person whining about the co-op costume items. Except I want to add one thing: the game is a first person game, so that means that unless you place your portals just right, you won't ever even SEE what your robot is or is not wearing. And if you can't even see it, you are absolutely not losing anything by not having it. And I really doubt the guy you're playing with who can see your character model feels like he's missing a piece of the game because your character isn't wearing a hat with a mini companion cube on top.
Oh, one last thing:
An awesome white ex-Navy SEAL dude with short brown hair? Damn, probably the only way to make Portal 2 more awesome than it already is would be to put Sam Axe (Bruce Campbell) in it. And now I'm sad because that will likely never happen.
Yeah, I couldn't believe it back when I got L4D and L4D2. They were both on sale in this little pack, both games for $7 or something very low like that. And then I loaded it up and found a buttload of DLC in both games that had also been provided completely FREE. That is fucking sweet, and Valve is awesome.Longsight said:
I'm very glad you brought up the Dragon Age DLC salesman. It killed the game for me and I swore myself off of EA products after that. I can't even play it anymore knowing that the NPC is waiting for me at camp to try and sell me premium content. It's absolutely vile, disgusting, abhorrent. There is no atmospere anymore when you crush it that badly. I am absolutely pissed that there wasn't more of a backlash against it.
I don't like Portal 2's DLC but it's un-intrusive and non-essential, the way it should be. I didn't even see it was there when I played. There are much more important targets if we want to take back our rights as consumers.
I don't like Portal 2's DLC but it's un-intrusive and non-essential, the way it should be. I didn't even see it was there when I played. There are much more important targets if we want to take back our rights as consumers.
Slightly off topic, but it bugs me people complaining about the length, part of the reason it was over so quickly is because it was so good that people weren't stopping! One of the biggest sales taglines for books is 'I couldn't put it down!' but it seems when a game makes you binge thru pure quality it's a bad thing.
There's a lot of games I can take or leave, play a bit here or there, Portal 1 was not one of them, nothing else mattered until I'd beaten it.
I'm in agreement tho, if Portal 2 is the full game, but you have the option of buying a funny hat for a few bucks, where is the problem?
There's a lot of games I can take or leave, play a bit here or there, Portal 1 was not one of them, nothing else mattered until I'd beaten it.
I'm in agreement tho, if Portal 2 is the full game, but you have the option of buying a funny hat for a few bucks, where is the problem?
The DLC in Portal, is basically, no exactly the same as the one in Team Fortress 2, TF2 has some hats and weapons (most if not all of which can be found in the game normally) is CONSTANTLY updated and Balanced, recently raised lots of money for Japan.
It was no surprise to me that this is in Portal 2. its Vanity items, the SINGLE best use for DLC. New Vegas has OP weapons for people who pre-ordered, Epically the Caravan Pack, that dam shotgun and armor are close if not actually the best in the game. DA2 has a sword that not the best in the game levels with you, and some good armor thats not as good as some i found in ACT 1 (Armor of the Fallen if your interested) DA:O had the Blood Dragon armor that was well balanced with its requirements (38/36 Strength i think) and some other pointless crap like an XP Ring (Really Bioware who isn't going to be high level at the end seriously).
But if and i hope to god not when, Activision or EA or whoever starts making DLC Op Weapons for Multi-player games like CoD or Battlefield, things might get bad, DLC atm is bearable and ignorable, Really Activision for just £7.99 i can get 4 bonus maps, wow i don't care. Really i can buy some nice hats for TF2 that i cant see its a FPS i think ill pass and just where the Top Hat (dam you TB) i found. Oblivions DLC, (PC and Xbox get the other crap thats not Expansions) is fine its a single player game and its mostly fun crap, like a Wizards Tower, or a Pirate base love that Pirate base, or Horse Armor, why did i buy Horse Armor. Fallouts again is Expansions with Crazy Op things. watching Josh use the Stealth Suit + Shishkabob + Pyromaniac and kill everyone in-front of everyone else was hilarious. but overall the game can be done and easily so without it, you dont have to play any of the DLC to get the full experience its just enhancement.
I think there is one company that truly gets content right. Eve-Online, Eve is a subscription based MMO, but for your £8-9 a mounth (you can play for free just requires you to earn 375million ISK( in-game money) a mounth) you get the game in what ever its current release is (Incursion ATM) EVERY Patch, EVERY Expansion, 2 Test Servers (known as Singularity and Duplicity) seriously there is a alot of content and they keep adding to it theres a Mahoosive one coming code named Incara i wont go in to it theres a lot of info.
this is a copy of a facebook comment i made for this post
It was no surprise to me that this is in Portal 2. its Vanity items, the SINGLE best use for DLC. New Vegas has OP weapons for people who pre-ordered, Epically the Caravan Pack, that dam shotgun and armor are close if not actually the best in the game. DA2 has a sword that not the best in the game levels with you, and some good armor thats not as good as some i found in ACT 1 (Armor of the Fallen if your interested) DA:O had the Blood Dragon armor that was well balanced with its requirements (38/36 Strength i think) and some other pointless crap like an XP Ring (Really Bioware who isn't going to be high level at the end seriously).
But if and i hope to god not when, Activision or EA or whoever starts making DLC Op Weapons for Multi-player games like CoD or Battlefield, things might get bad, DLC atm is bearable and ignorable, Really Activision for just £7.99 i can get 4 bonus maps, wow i don't care. Really i can buy some nice hats for TF2 that i cant see its a FPS i think ill pass and just where the Top Hat (dam you TB) i found. Oblivions DLC, (PC and Xbox get the other crap thats not Expansions) is fine its a single player game and its mostly fun crap, like a Wizards Tower, or a Pirate base love that Pirate base, or Horse Armor, why did i buy Horse Armor. Fallouts again is Expansions with Crazy Op things. watching Josh use the Stealth Suit + Shishkabob + Pyromaniac and kill everyone in-front of everyone else was hilarious. but overall the game can be done and easily so without it, you dont have to play any of the DLC to get the full experience its just enhancement.
I think there is one company that truly gets content right. Eve-Online, Eve is a subscription based MMO, but for your £8-9 a mounth (you can play for free just requires you to earn 375million ISK( in-game money) a mounth) you get the game in what ever its current release is (Incursion ATM) EVERY Patch, EVERY Expansion, 2 Test Servers (known as Singularity and Duplicity) seriously there is a alot of content and they keep adding to it theres a Mahoosive one coming code named Incara i wont go in to it theres a lot of info.
this is a copy of a facebook comment i made for this post
Okay... I see what you're saying, but I think you really should play the game for yourself before deciding what opinions you want to parrot. And to be honest, I sincerely doubt that anyone's expectations were met when they played Portal 2, because Portal was so spectacularly good. At best, we were only going to get a somewhat longer campaign and some incremental improvements in the story and gameplay. We were never going to get "the best game ever made EVAR, OMGWTFBBQPWN!!!"Therumancer said:
End part directed at Therumancer. Begin part directed at the people who actually played Portal 2 and then panned it for various reasons.
Shamus's point is that the DLC in Portal 2 is by no means the worst offender in the idiot-DLC department, and doesn't deserve to get down-rated solely for the issues with its DLC. If you want to say that Portal 2 was a vastly-inferior product because they sold out to the big time developers who completely missed the point of the original, that's fine. You still sound like a pretentious and incredibly stuck-up asshat, but that doesn't mean you're wrong. It just makes you sound untrustworthy, like a GameSpot reviewer.
However, if you've made that assessment because Portal 2 has lame DLC and not because the game itself was a disappointment, then I think you need to get your priorities straight. You do realize that we wouldn't be having this discussion at all if Valve decided to get rid of the DLC features entirely, right? What are you trying to say here? If you want to say Portal 2 is crap, talk about the game, not the ancillary content that you don't have to buy.
Also, I'm starting to agree more and more with Yahtzee that people should take the trouble to actually read the reviews because a complex opinion can't be expressed as a number. If you don't trust sites like GameSpot and IGN because their reviewers are all obviously bought-and-paid for, then follow <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/moviebob/8812-MovieBob-How-to-Read-Movie-Criticism>MovieBob's advice and find a critic you can trust instead. Stop whining about the things you can't control, like the fact that professional game reviewers are all corporate whores.
You're probably right, i think the timer usually works for me though, it says i've played 11 hours and that's what it took to beat the single and co-op, and that feels about right (7 for the story and 4 for co-op but the 4 for co-op might be off a bit). But steam still tells me that i have a 100% survival rate in L4D2 (as in I've escaped every campaign alive). I mean i'm awesome and all that but i'm not that awesome.mireko said:
Jjkaybomb said:
You'd be correct, if we were talking about the game itself. We're not though. We're talking about reaction to the game, and I'm standing in the same exact place as you or anyone else who played the game in this regard. Actually, I might even be closer to the truth than you depending on how many differant places you've been checking reactions on.
You'd be correct if I was saying that Portal 2's gameplay was lacking or something like that, but I haven't said that. In fact I've made no personal judgements of the game at all.
In Reference to Portal 2's Length, its about 3-4x as long as Portal 1, its a Puzzle game with a great story and good humor, but a Puzzle game can only be so long before it grates on people, Portal 2, as much as i'd love it to be longer (I cant get enough of that game) its pacing and length are close to perfect, it was any longer i think, i would get annoyed with it, the best thing with Portal 2 is its story and hidden easter egg (i don't recall finding any) make playing it 2-3 or 5 times fun, DAM YOU STEPHEN MERCHANT DAM YOU. we'll all have to wait for Portal 3 which should be out in time for HL2E3, or the Freezing of hell (HA Vale-Time joke, its not funny anymore is it) and its obvious there will be a Portal 3. there probably wont be a TF3, they can just keep updating TF2 forever.
I'm happy with DLC that is reasonably priced and adds value to the game, like say Magicka Vietnam. I also have no problem with DLC that only adds cosmetic elements for "peacock" players to show off, like TF2 hats or MMO non combat pets.
The problem is we're starting to see DLC that costs as much as entire games while offering very little value, like the CoD map packs, and even so called DLC that ships with the actual product but you actually have to pay for in order to be able to play it (Bulletstorm).
Game development studios are also far more reluctant to ship modding and mapping tools for the games they release, Duke Nukem Forever being the latest example.
It seems paying $60 for a game is no longer enough.
The problem is we're starting to see DLC that costs as much as entire games while offering very little value, like the CoD map packs, and even so called DLC that ships with the actual product but you actually have to pay for in order to be able to play it (Bulletstorm).
Game development studios are also far more reluctant to ship modding and mapping tools for the games they release, Duke Nukem Forever being the latest example.
It seems paying $60 for a game is no longer enough.