Launch-Day DLC Found on Risen 2 Game Disc

[Tomeran]

Personally I dont see the huge uproar over "on-disc" or day one dlc. It is little different from other dlc in my opinion. It is additional content that you pay to add more bits to your game.
It is the developers choice on how big the game is and what bits should be added later. Sure, its always best to have as much content as possible in a game from a gamers perspective, but is it such a huge evil for game developers to sell dlc to earn revenue? They got to make a living somehow, right? Is it greedy? Maybe, especielly seeing as was mentioned there isnt really an excuse for this other then an intentional moneygrab. But hey, them selling the game in the first place is an intentional moneygrab, and so is every other dlc pack that's bound to arrive. Greed is part of our daily life to the extent that I am surprised when people are surprised about it.

Seems to me that gamers think they are entitled to content just becuase it was originally "ready" and on the cd, and that this is how it differs from ordinary dlc. A question to consider here is: Does it really matter? Because day 1 dlc is hardly a new thing, and it could just as well have originally been put on the CD as well. Goes to day 10 dlc or day 100 dlc as well, depending on how much they could've prepared and planned.


I compare dlc to "mini-expansions". And last time I checked, there isnt quite the same uproar over having to buy expansion packs.

 

[omicron1]

Problem with this is, afaict, the treasure isle is plot/character significant (Patty was obsessed with it in Risen 1, even) gameplay cut out of the final release and sold back for extra dough. Deep Silver decided they wanted $70+ per copy of the game; only instead of saying so, they split the existing content and charged for the extra.

Best example I can give of where this is going is ridge racer vita. It's $30 (slightly cheaper than most games) but comes with 3 cars and 3 tracks. You get as much in a $10 DLC as they offer in the $30 full game. And, crucially, assembling enough content to match a full-priced game would take on the order of $80.

It's about money. More of our money for less content. If it is not ended, this is the future - $60 "full" games with the first few missions in, plus a mountain of DLC that doubles the price of the game in question.

 

[Skratt]

There are enough people that played Risen they made a sequel?

I'm still upset at Deep Silver for their no local split screen co-op of Dead Island so I really have to laugh at them for this.

I predict companies will simply start holding back the on disc DLC and release it later. Thus creating the illusion they worked tirelessly on additional content. Anyone that thinks many companies don't already do this are mistaken.

 

[Xorph]

Seems to me that gamers think they are entitled to content just becuase it was originally "ready" and on the cd, and that this is how it differs from ordinary dlc.

Thing is, it WAS/IS ready on the disk. Meaning they made the game, then at the last minute said "Hey, let's cut this part (and often a plot-centric part) out, and charge the players day one to buy it." in an effort to make extra cash off the game. Ordinary DLC is often made well after a game's release (Skyrim, for example, isn't getting its first DLC for about another month I believe), and in many cases isn't even planned (fully, at least) ahead of time. Yes, regular DLC still makes them money, but it makes them money because their game sold well and the players want more, not because they cut content out in an effort to squeeze extra cash from people who already sent them $50 or more.

 

[Podunk]

Another company hoping that nobody will notice their APC(Additional Purchaseable Content) on the disk. You think by now they'd have figured out how to spin this. It's not that hard.

 

[Woodsey]

If they can get away with it, they will do it.

Only they haven't really gotten away with it, because people have unlocked it and been playing with it.

 

[fozzy360]

I compare dlc to "mini-expansions". And last time I checked, there isnt quite the same uproar over having to buy expansion packs.

Maybe because actual expansion packs include huge amounts of brand new content months after the initial game has been released, as opposed to on-disc DLC, which is just the same content but locked out until the player ponies up another five or ten dollars just to access it? You're really gonna make the comparison? Really?

 

[Wicky_42]

So? ...No I'm serious, what's the point of this news story? On-disk DCL isn't new I've been hearing story about it for years now. Gamers being angry over it isn't news. I suppose the game itself being the latest to use this scheme is news except that the majority of the article seems to have its focus elsewhere de-emphasizing the particular game. As far as I see all this story does is capitalizing on gamer angst by publishing another story over the continuation of a contested issue in order to get people to comment in anger.

Actually I'd like to do an experiment where we get the angriest and smartest gamers who have a problem with this and ask them to fix it without changing the core concept. I'd like to see what changes they make to it. How can you spin this as a good thing?

Erm, the core concept is the bit we have a problem with XD Look, if a company ends up with time left over and wants to make more content that's fine - take time over it, polish it up, expand on it and release it as a nice chunky expansion at an appropriate price point for the game play time and effort involved. If it's 3 maps, don't charge half as much as the entire original game cost, but if it's 4-6 hours of gameplay consider launching it as a fully-fledged expansion.

Day 1 DLC is a complete slap in the face to all those who buy the software. Putting it actually on the disk people buy and then demand that they pay for it again? I have no words suitable. It's just completely retarded and unnecessary, especially if it's single player content so there's not even the excuse of multiplayer compatibility. I don't see how this is a complicated situation, and yet dev after dev seem to be doing it and certain people keep defending it, as if being reamed by publishers is in some way a good thing.

 

[Tomeran]

I compare dlc to "mini-expansions". And last time I checked, there isnt quite the same uproar over having to buy expansion packs.

Maybe because actual expansion packs include huge amounts of brand new content months after the initial game has been released, as opposed to on-disc DLC, which is just the same content but locked out until the player ponies up another five or ten dollars just to access it? You're really gonna make the comparison? Really?

On-disc dlc shows the descicion to take out parts of the game(often very small parts) and sell it separatly. To me, the only distinction between this and ordinary dlc(especielly day-one dlc) is that it shows the descicion to earn money on dlc more clearly, and since I figure its fairly obvious anyway, im not very shocked. Nor am I very offended, because dlc to me is just buying extra little tiny bits to the game, as I said, mini-expansions, and all on-disc dlc is removing a tiny bit, usually unessential, that was there in the first place.

However

As was stated earlier in the thread: If the dlc in question is an utterly essential part of the Risen storyline(I dont know enough about the game or the dlc in question to state that myself) then I will fully agree that its a massivly dickish move, because it pretty much forces any Risen fan to buy the dlc if they want a complete(or decent) experience, and that makes any "mini-expansion" argument void. It would be a real mean descicion against the consumers and the equilent of selling a person a car without any seats, tires, steering wheel or engine.


I havent personally had many experiences like that though, and the one perhaps most widely argued was the "from the ashes"-dlc for mass effect 3, which was also a case of "on-disc" dlc that was originally planned to be in the game for free. Unlike a fair few upset by that descicion by Bioware, I didnt have an issue with it -at all-, because Javik to me was just a bonus, and never ever essential. And I dont mind the concept of paying a little bit of extra for a bonus, even if that bonus was originally planned to be in the game for free.

 

[chiefohara]

I bought the collectors edition of Mass effect 3 so the day one DLC didn't affect me much, but i had hoped that there was sufficient outcry to put a stop to this sort of practice.

Unfortunately that seems to be not the case, and this is not only going to get worse, companies are going to become more brazen with it. Vote with your wallets people and don't buy, also feel free to mention your displeasure on metacritic

Reviewers could also do their bit and mention this and how it affects the players experience and value for money when content is squeezed out to facilitate a cash grab.