Jimquisition: On-Disc DLC Cannot Be Justified

[Faux Furry]

What rampant hypocrisy this is. This very video has 'DLC' hidden away in it which will likely be released in the event of a schedule slip, one which peels back a few layers and reveals that Jim was wearing a bikini all along.
I'm wondering if being in the Publisher's Club provides a discount on that DLC when it comes out.

What's next, Angry Video Game Nerd skin for Yahtzee in Zero Punctuation?!

 

[OldDirtyCrusty]

This episode was made for me... it must be. Thank you Mr.Sterling and keep`em comming.

I love Jim and we see eye-to-eye on almost every topic, but I cannot fully agree here. I guess there are exceptions to everything.


EDIT:

Jim, I rarely disagree with you, but I think you don't know enough about development cycles to have a leg to stand on here.

Let's get right to the meat of the situation: would you rather have the content as on disk DLC, day 1 actual download DLC, or would you rather not have the content.

Also this.

Where`s the fourth option? Pay the game and have all the content right at the start?

Development cycles my ass. The option to give customers and fans a big "Fuck You and gimme all your monies" keeps my wallet closed (on disk-DLC). Like someone already stated you don`t have to know something about production to feel ripped of. It all sounds like a big pile of shit anyway.

The option to extend a games life with later released content is another thing, if it`s done right. GTA4 and RDR where doing it right (at least to me, i didn`t feel ripped of or that they cutted contend away).

 

[mattttherman3]

Compare this. Selling a game for $75 and selling a game for $60 and then asking for $15 more to turn it into full version instead of crippled one. Which one is a douchebag tactics?

That said, Cliffy B. Biggest douche in the industry. Never buy his games new.

I agree with you on that point, anything but gears of war is a rental for me from epic.


DLC can be great, look at Fallout 3 and NV(well except gun runners, I got all the achievements and you want me to pay to get more weapons? I bought the DLC for the story you jack holes!!!!!!!) Oblivion had great DLC as well. ME2(except wepons and Arrival) DAO(darkspawn chronicles was TERRIBLE, worst dlc, witch hunt was bad too). On disk dlc is dumb though.

 

[mjc0961]

I'm surprised that Jim didn't rail on the other incredibly fucking stupid thing Cliffy B said in that interview: that once games go fully digital, on-disc DLC will go away.

No it won't you twat, it just won't be called that anymore. If you think you and other scummy devs and publishers will stop locking away content until we pay even more money just because the disc is gone, you're nuts. There will still be locked content, it just won't be called "on disc DLC" because there is no disc. Think I'm wrong? Go download Mass Effect 3 from Origin. You totally won't be able to add Zavik to your game by altering a single line of code because there is no locked-away content in digital games. Oh wait.

But yeah, other than that, I agree completely with the video. On-disc DLC is completely unjustifiable. We're already paying $60 for your game. Give us everything on the disc (or in the download) for that initial purchase. I'll pay extra money for DLC when you do EXTRA WORK TO CREATE BRAND NEW CONTENT. I'm not paying you an extra $20 for an unlock key, fuck off.

Also, on-disc DLC is completely indefensible, and I will now be adding everyone who tried to defend it in this thread to my ignore list. Such people will clearly never have anything intelligent to say ever, and thus I would rather save myself time in the future by never having to read a single one of their posts ever again.

 

[Sunrider]

This episode was made for me... it must be. Thank you Mr.Sterling and keep`em comming.

I love Jim and we see eye-to-eye on almost every topic, but I cannot fully agree here. I guess there are exceptions to everything.


EDIT:

Jim, I rarely disagree with you, but I think you don't know enough about development cycles to have a leg to stand on here.

Let's get right to the meat of the situation: would you rather have the content as on disk DLC, day 1 actual download DLC, or would you rather not have the content.

Also this.

Where`s the fourth option? Pay the game and have all the content right at the start?

Development cycles my ass. The option to give customers and fans a big "Fuck You and gimme all your monies" keeps my wallet closed (on disk-DLC). Like someone already stated you don`t have to know something about production to feel ripped of. It all sounds like a big pile of shit anyway.

The option to extend a games life with later released content is another thing, if it`s done right. GTA4 and RDR where doing it right (at least to me, i didn`t feel ripped of or that they cutted contend away).

If you think "fuck you and gimme all your monies" is all that is on the mind of the people who put work into DLC, I have nothing to add to this discussion.

 

[jehk]

Disagree sorta. There's plenty of justification for having some (not all - mainly a technical issue) of the DLC on disc.

 

[weirdee]

The main issue here is separating "additional content" from "actual content that we told the publisher was additional content so that they would get off our backs about having additional content". It is a judgment call that is not easy to make sometimes, but the main reason we have it is because a few developers buckled into those demands (or hell, even CAME UP WITH THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE for all we know) for perhaps favor or additional funding, and then after seeing the results, abuse their position of power to pressure the developers because they feel like they have to jump on the trend to either stay in business or get more money.

"Company X is doing this. Why aren't you doing this? Perhaps if we hired another group, they would do what needs to be done to compete, and we wouldn't need you anymore, or we'll cancel your project and hand your funding to our other projects who are all complying with these requirements (example: capcom's entire corporate philosophy). Well? It is your decision. "

 

[OldDirtyCrusty]

...

If you think "fuck you and gimme all your monies" is all that is on the mind of the people who put work into DLC, I have nothing to add to this discussion.[/quote]

This goes for "on DISK-DLC" which seems like a big slap into the face of paying customers and fans who support the game. This post wasn`t meant to offend you (sorry if i have) but on disk justification just makes me jump and i can`t get rid of this cloudy red vision. I just can`t understand people who suppport this (at least not from the paying end of the line).

I have always the choice to not buy games with locked content or heavy DLC support but i really hate the thougt that this whole on disk thing might give developers/publishers i like funny ideas for their next games.

 

[Sunrider]

This goes for "on DISK-DLC" which seems like a big slap into the face of paying customers and fans who support the game. This post wasn`t meant to offend you (sorry if i have) but on disk justification just makes me jump and i can`t get rid of this cloudy red vision. I just can`t understand people who suppport this (at least not from the paying end of the line).

I have always the choice to not buy games with locked content or heavy DLC support but i really hate the thougt that this whole on disk thing might give developers/publishers i like funny ideas for their next games.

Nah, I wasn't offended. I just think people are overreacting.
I know a few people with download limits who are happy when the DLC is already on the disc. Not picking sides here, just saying.

 

[Podunk]

APC(Additional Purchasable Content, because we desperately need a new acronym already) would be accepted and even loved by the consumer base if video game companies weren't doing what they usually do- MISHANDLING THE SHIT OUT OF PR/MARKETING. Which seems like a better idea:

(Prior to release)Company A: We finished your awesome game, and we have 10 more characters to add. too! Look forward to seeing future APC for Shtreet Fighter x Shmekken!

(Prior to release)Company B:[Doesn't say anything, just puts the 10 characters on the disc and expects everyone to ignore that and pay for it whenever they decide to unlock it for them]

Game companies would have such an easier time if they didn't act evil, manipulative, and duplicitous.

ALSO: The idea of 'it has to be on the disc' is bullshit. Even cheap-o downloadable fighting game Deadliest Warrior(awesome game btw) says 'no, stop. Download this little patch so that people who bought our DLC can use it.' when you try to go online in it. BlazBlue did this too, if I'm not mistaken. Mortal Kombat handling it so poorly is completely baffling, but that doesn't meant there aren't better ways for doing it. Because I am willing to bet if you have an Xbox and are paying for a fucking Gold subscription you damn sure have a hard drive, memory card, or flash drive to save your shit. A tiny little character patch isn't going to break the bank.

 

[Kapol]

While I normally at least respect Jim's opinion, I kind of think he came off as whiny himself this time. The pictures of the baby kind of seemed ironic in a strange way.

Here's the thing, DLC where all or the majority of the content is on the disk is, in fact, horseshit. I don't disagree with that fact. The Street Fighter Vs. Tekken (I think that's the game at least) problem where they said the DLC had to be on the disk for compatibility is flat out stupid. As are things like the Dead Space 2 items which, while you weren't able to buy them, were still in the game files.

But that doesn't mean that all DLC that has content on the disk is like that. There are things that the developers have enough time to include while not being able to finish the entirety of it without delaying the full game (pissing off many fans in bigger series). Things like walk animations, or obvious spots in menus for characters are there because they're finished and there's no real point in not including them. Many games have their DLC planned out after all. That saves download bandwidth and makes it so those kinds of necessary parts don't glitch out other aspects of the game. Then you can download everything else, such as the additional environments, additional dialog and options if the game has it, and things like where the character will actually be later on. So there might be content on the disk, but that doesn't always mean that it's finished content that's just locked off.

Of course, with companies trying to flood out DLC that could have obviously just been included (Saints Row 3 being one of the worst in my opinion), I can understand a lot of the automatic hate DLC gets. Things like the entire fighter or extra content being ready to go but just gated off doesn't leave much room for excuses. But that doesn't mean all DLC with some content in the data files or on the disk are bad. Just that some companies are jerks who we shouldn't buy from.

 

[Jimothy Sterling]

I never said DLC was bad. In fact, I said I liked it in theory.

It's when companies try to wheedle a free-to-play model out of a full-priced game that it gets on my nerves. It's the excuses that piss me off.

 

[Nicolairigel]

Okay, so, someone may need to clarify something for me. Is the entire "From Ashes" DLC from Mass Effect 3 "on disk dlc?" As in, was all the content for it on the disk? If it was, then in that case I would agree with Jim.

However, from what I heard concerning the entire "From Ashes" dlc was that Bioware developed it while the game was being shipped and then added some compatibility on the disk. I remember having to actually physically download the expansion and install the dlc, I don't THINK it was already on the disk, but I'm not too sure. If this is true, then I don't really have a problem with it. If Bioware chose to make new content while waiting for it to be shipped, then I just don't really understand what the complaint is, it isn't "locking off" any of the games actual content, it's just something extra.

 

[dessertmonkeyjk]

It's odd that they choose to waste disc space in this graphic heavy race by putting DLC there. Couldn't they just force players to be matched with others in multiplayer that match the content they do? It's been done before so it's not that difficult.

Of course, one may argue about having all the planned DLC released for the game on the disc so late adopters can unlock it without the fear of the server it would be downloaded from going offline. Just put it in a seperate pack or a GotY version or... something. Just don't put it on the disc at launch.

 

[geizr]

Yeah I really enjoy seeing companies flail about defending their practices.

"Oh but our right to lie, rip you off, and rob you is ours! ARTISTIC INTEGRITY!"

I also can just laugh in your face, not buy your game...OR BUY IT USED.
If anything developers need to learn that they cant keep doing this.

Bioware is going to see some lagging sales for anything they do. Dont get me wrong ME3/DA2 had good PARTS, but on the whole they were not worth 60 dollars.
You keep doing that and people will just stop buying your stuff.

No matter how artistically you maintain your integrity.

In some ways, I think this is what is wrong with the entire game community and culture. No matter how much game publishers keep bending gamers over the rail and forcing them to take it, we just keep handing money to them. Until gamers stop engaging in this addictive junkie culture with gaming (the bulk of which, in my opinion, was created and propagated by the gaming press) and exercise some self-control to actually not buy from a game publisher that consistently mistreats them as customers, game publishers will continue to feel free to engage in nefarious practices and find any number of outlandish rationales to justify those practices. Gamers need to learn to just say NO! Don't pirate, but definitely don't buy it. No amount of rationalization can save a publisher from a $0 revenue stream because the entire market finally decided it had had enough and simply will not buy.

 

[Strain42]

Y'know, episodes like this are why I really miss Extra Credits being on this site. Has anyone noticed that often both the Jimquisition and Extra Credits tackle the same subject, and even when they're on the opposite sides of the argument, they both manage to bring up valid points in their own right?

You wanna see the real No Right Answer, watch Extra Credits coupled with The Jimquisition (no offense to the fine folks at No Right Answer...)

I admit, I myself can't say much about DLC because...well...I hardly ever use it. I think I've only ever downloaded about 5 bits of DLC in the history of all my consoles. Two of those were the Saints Row 2 bonus missions...and I can't even remember the other ones, but I think it was just free stuff.

 

[Dryk]

I've always been of the opinion that if a developer doesn't think they can make their budget back at $60 the solution is for them to have a smaller budget and work within their means, rather than covertly raise the price.

 

[mavrik]

On one hand we listen to full-of-money EA backed developers whine about development costs of a DLC at time of launch and on the other hand we have awesome moves like that from CDProjectRed, where they give you additional content, voiceovers and quests for Witcher 2 for FREE [http://en.thewitcher.com/enhancededition/] almost a year after relase.

In the past after-release support wasn't something optional and payable - it was expected and we usually got new content with free patches (see UT, Quake 3, etc.) - there's not reason for that to stop now. Apologizing EA for money grabs for already very expensive games just rewards that kind of money-grabbing behaviour - there's no reason for a developer to not release additional content developed in time to release for FREE.

 

[WinterOrbit]

A bunch of people have mentioned the Extra Credits video about Mass Effect DLC, which is really interesting but doesn't quite share the same topic as Jim's talk.

The Extra Credits folks were talking about Day 1 DLC, which not only doesn't have to be on-disc but could be justified as more than a money grab if the team worked on it between certification (after the game is already locked down) and release.

Disc-locked Content, on the other hand, had to have been created at the same time as the main development. And I really wish companies wouldn't do this because it takes time and resources away from the main game.

 

[Eric Morales]

If I don't want a piece of DLC, I wont buy it. If the game is "incomplete" to the point of being not worth it because too much vital content is being chopped off to be sold as DLC then I won't buy that game. Saying "if the choice is between having extra content that I can buy if I like and not having that content exist for anyone, I'd rather the content not exist at all" just strikes me as goddamn insanity. As for on disk DLC in particular, what's the harm? It's marginally more convenient than having to wait for whatever you're buying to actually download.

If the industry as a whole is becoming more reliant on DLC that's because so many people are buying used (in which case the developers don't see a dime). I may not admire all of Cliff Brzezinski's work, but I certainly think the perspective of someone who works in the industry might be more valuable than an arrogant sack of cartilage that fancies himself a commentator.

Anyone who's looking for a take on the subject from someone who hasn't had their brains and colons reversed, check out this short from Extra Credits http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/mass-effect-3-dlc


In another way, I'm sort of glad Jim Sterling made this video, his last few videos had seemed alarmingly reasonable and I was afraid I'd stepped into some kind of mirror universe.