Jimquisition: On-Disc DLC Cannot Be Justified

[teebeeohh]

for some reason i can see a company with a sense of humor use this as a marketing slogan: "GET EVERYTHING ON THE DISC BY BUYING IT"

 

[Eric the Orange]

Can't argue with Jim on any of that.

OT, though: I've been out of the series for awhile. When did "M. Bison" become "Vega?"

He was always Vega in japan. I have no Idea why but In Street Fight 2 the translation team switched around all the Boss Characters (except Sagat cause his name was already pre-established)

Balrog was M.Bison (Mike Bison, for the obvious reference)

Vega was Balrog

And Bison was Vega

 

[Nurb]

Hear hear!

Publishers created the situation, they created their problem, and they're making customers put up with something on a full priced game for the sole purpose of soaking an extra 2-15 dollars from them.

The large publishers and their developers are not worth supporting anymore, and I have no sympathy at all when they're crying to me about piracy, then try to screw me out of content already on a disc I buy but can't access without shelling out more cash or need an internet connection and a damn account somewhere to play it.

So fuck those guys, I hope pirates take a huge chunk out of their profits the size of all day-one and story-essential DLC

 

[babinro]

Gotta disagree here. On-Disc DLC is no different than regular DLC.

Developers can start creating the DLC content on day 1 of the development cycle and have it completed months of years before a game is ready for launch if they want.

I don't agree with trying to hide the truth behind it in PR talk, as companies love to do. But there's nothing wrong with companies planning DLC to be part of their game and making that content upfront.

It doesn't matter when the DLC was made or how it's delivered to the end user. All that matters is that it doesn't feel required to enjoy the core gaming experience.

 

[Eric the Orange]

The games industry is a business. And in the business to make money. If something will make them more money then they were making before than they will do it. True they are lying or at least obfuscating behind other reasoning. If they were to flat out say, we want more money, that would be bad PR. And thus decrease sales. So they're not going to do that.

Now on the other hand if people A didn't buy Day one DLC, or B didn't buy games that have Day one DLC at all, they would lose money. And then probably stop doing the practice.

You don't have to like it but yeah, it is what it is.

 

[Hazy992]

Whats with all the worms, Jim?

Jim and Cliffy B don't like each other very much, so I imagine he's doing it to take the piss.

 

[CatmanStu]

The thing is, Jim contradicts the title of this video in the video itself. In a round-about way he said that on disk DLC is justifiable if you say you did it as a money grab.

That's one way of looking at it. I look at it the same way their "it makes it easier to ensure everyone has the content" line -- it's a reason. It's just a more honest reason than one made to sound like the dev had no choice.

I see your point. I guess justification is like beauty; it only exists in the eye of the beholder.
If your moral compass points towards offering value for money or good service then on disk DLC is akin to buying a house only to find the top floor is occupied by a tiger; if your compass points to making profit then any decision that makes money will be justified.
Hell, tradesmen have been doing the whole "oooh, don't like the look of that, I'll have to get a new part" trick to get extra money for years; it's an unfortunate bi-product of greedy business people and specialised labour.

 

[targren]

Can't argue with Jim on any of that.

OT, though: I've been out of the series for awhile. When did "M. Bison" become "Vega?"

He was always Vega in japan. I have no Idea why but In Street Fight 2 the translation team switched around all the Boss Characters (except Sagat cause his name was already pre-established)

Balrog was M.Bison (Mike Bison, for the obvious reference)

Vega was Balrog

And Bison was Vega

I was not aware of that.

Cool. Learned something new today.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

Jim is fast becoming the best thing on The Escapist. Funnier than Yahtzee and talk more sense than Moviebob (much more as of late).

I was just thinking the same thing. The Jimquisition has significantly grown on me. Today I started and ended the episode with a grin on my face. At the same time, watching Yahtzee and MovieBob doesn't entertain me nearly as much as it used to.

Keep up the good work, Jim.

 

[LazyAza]

Yep Jim hit the nail on the head again. Man is next gen going to be rough when we're buying half a game for a 100 dollars and then the other half is unlocked for a further 50 dollars and they tell us "THIS WAS THE ONLY WAY GUYS BOO HOO WAHHH FEEL SORRY FOR US"

 

[esperandote]

He was always Vega in japan. I have no Idea why but In Street Fight 2 the translation team switched around all the Boss Characters (except Sagat cause his name was already pre-established)

Balrog was M.Bison (Mike Bison, for the obvious reference)

Vega was Balrog

And Bison was Vega

I was not aware of that.

Cool. Learned something new today.

Akuma is Gouki too . I didn't know about Mike Bison either.

What games just give you a 'key' as DLC that unlocks content already on the disk? What DLC has ever been mandatory for a game?

Is this just about Street Fighter additional characters?

The King of fighters XIII does that too.

Edit: Apparently Mortal Kombat too.

 

[TitanAura]

Plastic or otherwise, that ax had a lot of sharp points on it. I'd be a little scared to hold it.

 

[Eric the Orange]

Extra Credits makes an interesting counterpoint.

http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/mass-effect-3-dlc

Their ideas are valid but shot down by one simplt truth. Aftermarket support. I get that budgets are tight BUT i don't have enough sympathy for multi-billion dollor corporations to see why this is so suddenly necessary.

EA, Capcom and everyone esle are doing this because they can. An example i like to use is Command and Conquer 3. The game was a hit, it made a good deal of profit. EA and EA studios LA had the common decency to release free maps for the game post release, even so ar as a whole year afterwards to keep it fresh. Same for the expansion Kane's Wrath.

EA didn't go bankrupt. Developing this kind of content is pretty cheap. The community can churn decent maps/skins out by the bucket-load with ZERO resources. Once upon a time it used to be a common courtasy for a developer to give an online PC game a few free updates here and there back when console games were not generally online. Companies have been doing this for decades without going out of business. Its called aftermarket support. Why do publishers act like any post-shipping support will cripple them?! It is a big fat LIE.

Even IF time is legitimately left over during the ratings period why make this content paid at all? Here is an idea guys, use it to fight used sales with a carrot instead of a stick. Let new buyers of the game unlock this extra ondisk content for free with a code. Give commited consumers something instead of taking something away. This is a no-brainer.

Thing is they're a business. If they can make more money they will. They understand that people do not like day one DLC and that will effect sales. But there math is, if money lost in sales is less than money gained in day one DLC, we will put in day one DLC. If they thought they would make more money by raising game prices to $100 a game, they sure as hell would do it. It's just the harsh reality of business.

Now the counter argument you could make to them is that they lose more money from sales with day one DLC than they would make up with it. Or that by doing this they are losing Consumer loyalty which could hurt them in the long run. Both of which may be true, I don't know, but all I'm saying is that in a business money is the reason to do anything. If a business decides to give to charity you can bet it's only because they want the positive publicity.

 

[The.Bard]

Whats with all the worms, Jim?

Also, put this vid on Capcoms site and watch the shitstorm.

I think you mean: "What's your obsession with the Earthworm, Jim?"

 

[Phlakes]

I usually agree with you, but I think the video misses the point that people are complaining about the on-disc part, not the DLC itself. I've heard a lot of people say they'd be okay with it if they would be downloading the actual content, and it seems like that's what Cliff was talking about.

To clarify, people want DLC, they just don't like the principle of it being on the disc and that part is the necessary evil, in the case that they want the DLC (which a lot do).

I mean, it wouldn't be there at all if there was no demand for it, not trying to say it's the consumers' fault, but it's not like developers are just doing it for the lulz.

 

[InvisibleMan]

So, all developers need to do is change the label from "DLC (DownLoadable Content)" to "ULC (UnLockable Content)"...

There, problem solved!

 

[ryo02]

when consoles started going online I was very hopefull about it ...
... but then
whiney kids calling people fags
pre order bonus dlc dlc dlc dlc map pack dlc dlc weapon pack dlc
cut content cut only to be sold later
glitchy games
patch
patch
patch
patch
patch
patch
patch
patch

I wasnt happy

 

[Simonoly]

I find the whole on-disc dlc fiasco totally confusing. What seems to me is that on-disc dlc is just a part of the development cycle now for many games. If a developer has the time and resources they can create content which they deem 'extra' and place it on the disc alongside the main content. The problem with this model, is that we basically have to take it on good faith that what a developer classifies as 'extra' is indeed content which they planned in addition to the main content. Unfortunately for the developer there is no way that they can really prove this and all we see is a game with content purposely locked out to us. For me, this also raises interesting questions on what it is we're actually paying for when we buy a game. Are we paying for the developers time and so therefore we should expect access to all content created in that time? Or are we just paying for a finalised product as the developer envisaged it?

 

[Smokescreen]

I think on disc DLC is silly but it works: Extra Credits had a episode on it which had some good points: http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/mass-effect-3-dlc

Also, on disc content means I don't have to use a ton of hard drive memory just to get expansion after expansion. Which is kinda nice.

But to try and pretend it's a problem that has been 'created' is utter crap.

 

[370999]

But Jim! That's the way the developers wanted the game to be! Don't you understand asking them to get rid of On-Disk DLC would impune the artistic integrity of the game! Do you WANT to set gaming back 10 years (to when they knew better)? It's THEIR game! Think how the developers must feel every time you point out something they shouldn't have done! LEAVE THE POOR DEVELOPERS ALONE! LEAVE THEM ALONE!Kony 2012!
-Movie Bob

Sorry, but I will give you a 1/10. Its the best I can do.

You failed to bring up how "entitled" gamers are. This must be done at least 5 times in each sentence to make it a believable parody of Bob.

If you want to make it even more convincing you have to shoehorn in

A) References to Bob's life in high school, try to link RME with jocks.
B) Mention Feminism but have a creepy rant about how totally hot a lesbian romance between Princess Peach and Daisy would be.