Portal 2 - DLC Backlash

[Keava]

But it isn't free. If I were to buy Portal 2, which I eventually plan to despite my complaints, then it would cost me $60. That isn't free, if you didn't check, and like you I don't care about the cosmetic shit. Still, why can't Valve put all of it into unlockables instead of charging me more money? No, the completed game should be on disc ready to play.

As for two different games - that's two different games. No, they shouldn't be on the same disc because they're two different games, but Portal 2 and this expensive DLC is not two different games. It's one game split into pieces - most of it on disc, and the rest for extra money on the internet.

Do you see what I'm saying? Why, may I ask, do you want to pay $60 for the game and then all the money for the extra? If you wanted it, then wouldn't you expect all the content to be on the disc at release?

As you say yourself you buy a game called Portal2 and that's what you get for the price of the game. It's easy as that. You pay for a product you get a product. You don't pay for product + extras, product + possible extras, product + another product. 60$ covers the game called Portal 2 and nothing else.

It's not given to you as unlockable because it's not unlockable content. It's additional content they want to sell to you. Because they want to make money. That's the whole point of having a business - to make money.

Just because you buy a product does not mean, at any point, that you are entitled to anything that is not sold as that specific product by the company that sells it. It's your, and only your, choice whenever you accept such deal or not.
If you think Portal 2 without the cosmetic additions is not worth 60$ you are free to wait for a promotion/price drop and get it at a price that you consider appropriate to what the product is.

Simple.

 

[thethingthatlurks]

I haven't bought Portal 2 yet, but Steam isn't showing any DLC on the store page. So my question is this: is that DLC thing just the party hats TF2 had, whose proceeds will go to the Japan relief effort? If so, the people complaining can just fuck off, ideally off a bridge. If, however, this is a real DLC with real missions/characters etc, then they have a point. Day 1 DLC shouldn't exist. Ever.

 

[MrSalamandra]

A more appropriate analogy would be certain applications on your phone being blocked until you pay a fee to have the block lifted, this DLC is way less intrusive than that, granted. But again, it's more principle than anything.

It's more like a fee to change the color of your screen on the alarm function. It's really a totally pointless thing to complain about given that what you're being deprived of is essentially nothing, and a nothing that was never advertised and no one expected anyway.

 

[Ranorak]

I haven't bought Portal 2 yet, but Steam isn't showing any DLC on the store page. So my question is this: is that DLC thing just the party hats TF2 had, whose proceeds will go to the Japan relief effort? If so, the people complaining can just fuck off, ideally off a bridge. If, however, this is a real DLC with real missions/characters etc, then they have a point. Day 1 DLC shouldn't exist. Ever.

It's just hats and emotions for the co-op.
Dunno if they go to Japan though.

No missions, no story progress. No...you know...Content.
Just hats and waves.

 

[Hyper-space]

Well, i hope people will shut the fuck up about the DLC mount in WoW after this, at least that adds something to the game instead of giving you a new hat or whatever.

 

[GamingAwesome1]

A more appropriate analogy would be certain applications on your phone being blocked until you pay a fee to have the block lifted, this DLC is way less intrusive than that, granted. But again, it's more principle than anything.

It's more like a fee to change the color of your screen on the alarm function.

Better analogy.

But still, do you not think phone owners would sort of go "What? Why?" at that?

Of course, it's a very minor gripe that doesn't at all hurt the main game but again, nip this shit in the bud.

 

[TwitchBlues]

I really LOVE (/sarcasm) the sense of entitlement that gaming fans have. They developed content X when I purchased Y. I deserve to get X too!

You purchased the game and only the game. You get the content included in that and only that. Any DLC, day one or otherwise, wasn't part of your transaction. Deal with it. If you dislike their business model, then don't buy the add-ons and hope that other people agree.

Interesting thought: I wonder how many people would be on here bitching if all of said DLC was included as part of a limited edition version of the game for $20-30 more dollars along with some random figure or something that costs $1 to make? Answer: they wouldn't because "it was included in the game"...for an additional charge, just like this DLC.

 

[Bill Bread]

Spoiler

"]I really LOVE (/sarcasm) the sense of entitlement that gaming fans have. They developed content X when I purchased Y. I deserve to get X too!

You purchased the game and only the game. You get the content included in that and only that. Any DLC, day one or otherwise, wasn't part of your transaction. Deal with it. If you dislike their business model, then don't buy the add-ons and hope that other people agree.

Then I'll pirate their shit. problem solved.[footnote]Moderator edit: Do not admit to or condone piracy. Read the posting guidelines.[/footnote]

 

[Wolfram23]

I swear it's like people never heard of "upgrade packages" before, like when you go buy a brand new top of the line car and then they say "oh, want a chrome grill?" "want nice rims?" "want the GPS nav?" Ok well it'll cost you extra!

It's called a business and it's fucking brilliant on Vavle's part. They gave you the full 100% game and then give you the option of buying a little inconsequential extra. As long as they supply a limited amount of these "hats" and shit in the game from beating it or getting achievements then it shouldn't matter at all.

 

[MrSalamandra]

What would you say if Valve had just shortcutted parts of the campaign and said "You have to pay if you want these extras"? Because that's essentially what day 1 DLC is, and I'd feel kind of cheated.

That's like saying that littering is equivalent to murder. They've denied you of something that is roughly equivalent to nothing. Removing parts of levels or entire levels would be millions of times more effectual than that.

Also, they're extras. Really pointless expensive extras, but still extras.

 

[Taerdin]

If they worked for extra weeks in order to make those assets, does it really matter whether they completed them before or after the game came out? Should they not be able to charge for their extra work?

Generally speaking, if I was doing extra work beyond what was expected, I would want to get paid. But maybe that's just me.

 

[Ranorak]

I really LOVE (/sarcasm) the sense of entitlement that gaming fans have. They developed content X when I purchased Y. I deserve to get X too!

You purchased the game and only the game. You get the content included in that and only that. Any DLC, day one or otherwise, wasn't part of your transaction. Deal with it. If you dislike their business model, then don't buy the add-ons and hope that other people agree.

Then I'll pirate their shit. problem solved.

And in comes the bann hammer.

Anyway,

It's kind of amusing to see this backlash.
I wonder if it also happened if they sold Portal 2 for the regular price, and sold a Collectors edition with hats for 20 dollars more.

You see. that's another way to see this.
A Special Edition where you can decide just how much more special you want it to be!
Draw yourself a nice blue and orange circle on a piece of paper and you have your concept art.

 

[Bill Bread]

And in comes the bann hammer.

I'm guessing that it may be beyond you that I could be not entirely serious.

It's kind of amusing to see this backlash.
I wonder if it also happened if they sold Portal 2 for the regular price, and sold a Collectors edition with hats for 20 dollars more.

I'd be ok with that. Only fools get those more expensive editions anyway.

 

[Knight Templar]

snip

It's not a good idea to announce your plans to break the law on these forums.

 

[Hydro14]

As Legion's stated with a bit more subtlety:

This is situation 1: it's £32 of game, £28 of which is items that you're not getting, leaving you with £4 of game that you paid £32 for.

This is situation 2: It's £60 of game and items; you're getting £32 of game which is exactly what you paid for.

Situation 2 exists in the real world. Situation 1 exists only in your mind. Aesthetic character customisation was not advertised as part of the game, therefore you do not as a consumer have any right to it with the purchase. This is like buying the game-only pack of Guitar Hero World Tour and complaining that it didn't come with the band kit.

 

[babinro]

Day 1 DLC is not remotely surprising anymore...programmers set aside people to make DLC while the game is still in production. The intention is to add content separate from the game to make more money from willing buyers (of which there are tons). Complain all you want, this isn't about to change.

I for one don't mind it...I fail to see why I should have to wait X months before DLC is accepted by the community when I can buy it day one while I'm still playing the game. I speak in general terms of course..Portal2 is far too short a game for me to justify paying full price on. I will likely buy it during holiday steam sales this year or next.

 

[Keava]

Yes, it is simple, I pay a lot of money for a complete game and expect the complete game to be in there, not just most of it. I do want the complete product and I expect nothing less than the complete product.

And that's exactly what you get. Additional content is not part of a complete product called Portal 2. It's separate product. Just like a new case for your console/PC.

What would you say if Valve had just shortcutted parts of the campaign and said "You have to pay if you want these extras"? Because that's essentially what day 1 DLC is, and I'd feel kind of cheated.

I wouldn't buy the game if it kept it's price. It's not like some smaller game series aren't released in per episode for lower entry costs. Loads of indie devs do it.

However cutting out core element's of campaign is not exactly the same as releasing additional skin textures. There is quite a huge gap in between. The campaign is not shortened by lack of bonus skins, nor are co-op missions. You got full product that you can upgrade with premium extras.

 

[dagens24]

This is the issue with micro transactions. People shit all over $60 price point and then complain when cheaper games over simple cosmetic features for money. There's no winning.

 

[Bill Bread]

As Legion's stated with a bit more subtlety:

This is situation 1: it's £32 of game, £28 of which is items that you're not getting, leaving you with £4 of game that you paid £32 for.

This is situation 2: It's £60 of game and items; you're getting £32 of game which is exactly what you paid for.

That really doesn't hold any water. You can't tell me with a straight face that this cosmetic stuff (which apparently doesn't matter, according to Valve Defence Force) is worth the price they're asking for. I paid for a game, I don't expect to get £30 of game and a load of stuff missing.
My copy of the orange box cost me £12, and that means Portal 1 was, for me, roughly £2.40. This means that Portal 2 is, for me, about 15 times the price. And they have the audacity to leave content out.

Roll on STALKER 2, I've had enough of shitty western devs ripping me off.

 

[Rusty Bucket]

I love this site. Everyone complains endlessly about day 1 DLC and micro-transactions, but when Valve does it half of the forums are leaping to their defense or pretending they've never had a problem with it.

Also, could I get some English in these captures please? I don't speak fucking Latin. Could we at least use text that's actually readable instead of unintelligible scrawling?