The Consumer... Doesn't Matter Anymore?

[Hakudamashi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqgRP5_YKu0&feature=plcp&context=C415b0d9VDvjVQa1PpcFMjUCRFIelSOx-IxiUuAzv42aOqE_gUmjY%3D

I watched this video, and then I look back at games that get all the cash ala unfinished games like Street Fighter.

So like, we're no longer part of the equation when a game is made? Developers can now exploit the f*ck outta their games to milk as much money as they can, and we're just to... "deal with it"?

[Supersonic196]

Solution: don't buy those games, or just don't buy the DLC.

[Hakudamashi]

Solution: don't buy those games, or just don't buy the DLC.

That's what I used to think, but then now that more and more companies are pulling off this sh*t, it's starting to get to me because I WANT to play those games

Like Street Fighter X Tekken, I like the roster, the team combat system intrigues me, and being a fighting game fan myself, I go giddy as I see these pros explain the technicallities and pull of feats that I WANT to do myself. I want to buy this game, and give the well deserved money to those people who came up with the ideas that make it worth the $60 I spend on it.
But on the opposite end of the spectrum, by giving my money to them means  I also support the idea of Disc-Locked content(Why am I paying more money for content that is already on the disc I payed $60 for?), no story mode in a crossover game(I'll save that for some other topic), the broken sound in online matches that's jarring as f*ck, lack of modes other than fightfightfight, and I can go on.

In other words this isn't a case of Super Mario 3D Land where even though I hate and don't support mandatory collecting, there is enough positives to it to make me sad "I'm happy with my purchase". The game interests me, I WANT to play it, I DON'T want to resort to pirating, I WANT to support those good people who worked hard to make the gameplay and content worth the money I spend on it, but even more so I don't want give money saying I support your practice and to say "An incomplete game is cool with me", worse that if these practices are bringing in the money, then more companies will start doing it with their games (I'm looking at you Soul Calibur V >=U).

"Don't Buy The DLC"
Again, same problem, I WANT the content in the DLC, I WANT to pay the people who thought of the content in it, I DON'T want to support how it's used ( Day 1 DLC, pre-order bonuses, retail exclusive bonuses etc.)

[Supersonic196]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h472NmF1HEQ&feature=player_embedded

[Hakudamashi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h472NmF1HEQ&feature=player_embedded

I watched this sometime ago when it was funny, watching it now makes me shed a tear...

[Elija2]

Apparently Final Fantasy 13-2 ends with some cliffhanger and to get the full story you have to buy the DLC.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1218042p1.html

[Hakudamashi]

Apparently Final Fantasy 13-2 ends with some cliffhanger and to get the full story you have to buy the DLC.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1218042p1.html

Old news bro

That's right, you need to pay more moneys to g\unlock the "true ending", which hasn't released yet btw. Looks like not even our RPGs are safe from this practice =/
Again, another game I REALLY wanted to support, but said "f*ck it" because I found out it pulled off sh*t like this...

[Elija2]

I hear Katawa Shoujo 2 will have DLC for the true endings and sex scenes.

[TheGameNinja]

I agree with what he said. I disliked the ending(s) to ME3, but I don't think they should have to change it because of that. It's not right to tell someone to change their work because you don't like it.

That said, I disagree with what he said about the DLC. The fact that it is on the disc is what makes it wrong, not the fact that the DLC exists. If they want to make DLC available the day the game comes out, fine. But if I buy that disc, I deserve to have access to anything on it. That is not entitlement, that is ownership. If someone sold you a car at full price and then you bought a sunroof as an extra, but you found out the sunroof was there all along and you only paid them to open it up... you would not like that, would you?

[shadowDOESrock]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqgRP5_YKu0&feature=plcp&context=C415b0d9VDvjVQa1PpcFMjUCRFIelSOx-IxiUuAzv42aOqE_gUmjY%3D

I watched this video, and then I look back at games that get all the cash ala unfinished games like Street Fighter.

So like, we're no longer part of the equation when a game is made? Developers can now exploit the f*ck outta their games to milk as much money as they can, and we're just to... "deal with it"?

I agree with this guy.

Its not like you're gonna compain when buying a car (e.g BMW) that you have to pay extra for the navigation system - even though its already in the car - they just unlock it.

Same here - if you're gonna buy (e.g Street Fighter X Tekken) you get exactly what you knew you're gonna get.
There is DLC Content on the disc, so what? If you want that additional content, you pay for it!
In SFxT's case - the characters are free to the Vita Version so that you buy a Vita & the Vita copy of the game.

Now, if (in Capcom's Case) the content was not stored on the disc - instead downloaded over e.g Xbox Live no one would complain.
No one complained before when everything was downloaded and not stored on the Disc. No one complained about Battlefield Bad Company 2 having DLC for an entire year on the disc. No one complained about Halo 3's Map packs. No one complained about Street Fighter 2 releasing various times with additional content. No one complained about  Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 adding a few objects on a disc at an unbelieveable high price. No one complained that Forza 3 released all the DLC on a Disc afterwards for a cheaper price that the original game.

So why now? I dont get it to be honest. Why complain about something now when you've been fine with since the introduction Street Fighter 2? Instead of buying the entire game at full price again with some new content on it - you get it as DLC for e.g 1500msp.

Lets take Call Of Duty for example - people have been complaining about the DLC beeing 'priced to high' & 'should have already been on the disc'.
You get like this huge multiplayer experience with 16 Maps. Then, almost a half year later you get a bunch of maps.
'I've been ripped off'

No, you have not been ripped off since you where the Idiot who bought the DLC in the first place. You know what you're gonna get. If you dont want it or think its priced to high dont buy it. IF you want it - you buy the additional content.

Or don't even buy the game at all - wait for a couple of months until a 'Ultimate Edition' comes out.

Or what about Sonic Adventure? No one really complained about having to buy the entire game again just to get a mission mode and slightly enhanced graphics? Nor that the 360/PS3 version has a 'Sonic Adventure DX Upgrade' DLC just to get the Mission Mode.

I can only repeat - If you want the additonal content, you buy it. Its addtional - stored on the disc or not.

-------------------

Now, i dont get whats going on exactly with Mass Effect 3's Ending. But as far i get it - people dont like the games ending - they bitch about it - now a DLC's coming out for a better ending - people bitch about having to pay for the DLC? What?

[jkid101094]

-Words-

I kinda skimmed this but your points seemed to be from times where:

A). People had money.
B). DLC was not an option.

In the days of Dreamcast you couldn't just log onto the online store and download a graphics patch. That made SA to SADX perfectly plausible. These days our tech has gotten better and as a result these remakes aren't going to cut it. Why pay $60 for the mission mode and graphics updates to a game when we are just as capable of paying $20 through DLC? The only reason remakes would be justified these days is if said remakes were for a different system than the original. Obviously games for the N64 can't download shit from the E Shop so something like Mario 64 DS makes perfect sense. MvC3, however, is PERFECTLY capable of releasing a patch over DLC and that's why UMvC3 isn't justified in any sense. The games offer only 8 different character and a changed HUD. That's just about it. That could have just as well been DLC. At least the LBP to LPB2 switch offered more than new costumes, I say it's justified because as DLC it would devour your hard drive. Games like UMvC3 have no excuse.

As for on disc DLC I can't see any company that has seen what the fans can do would put DLC on a disc for any other reasons than saving hard drive space.

[shadowDOESrock]

I kinda skimmed this but your points seemed to be from times where:

A). People had money.
B). DLC was not an option.

In the days of Dreamcast you couldn't just log onto the online store and download a graphics patch. That made SA to SADX perfectly plausible. These days our tech has gotten better and as a result these remakes aren't going to cut it. Why pay $60 for the mission mode and graphics updates to a game when we are just as capable of paying $20 through DLC? The only reason remakes would be justified these days is if said remakes were for a different system than the original. Obviously games for the N64 can't download shit from the E Shop so something like Mario 64 DS makes perfect sense. MvC3, however, is PERFECTLY capable of releasing a patch over DLC and that's why UMvC3 isn't justified in any sense. The games offer only 8 different character and a changed HUD. That's just about it. That could have just as well been DLC. At least the LBP to LPB2 switch offered more than new costumes, I say it's justified because as DLC it would devour your hard drive. Games like UMvC3 have no excuse.

As for on disc DLC I can't see any company that has seen what the fans can do would put DLC on a disc for any other reasons than saving hard drive space.

You dont have to buy UMvC3 and UMvC3 Enhanced Edition. 

[jkid101094]

You dont have to buy UMvC3 and UMvC3 Enhanced Edition.  

You don't have to buy the first game either, however, if you want to stay updated with the game you have to pay for two new games (possibly either $60 or $120 depending on which ones you buy) for the sole purpose of getting content which could have just as easily have been DLC. You also have to pay to play online because I'm pretty sure MvC3 and UMvC3 players can't play together. If they wanted to give us both an option to buy the disc and the option to separately buy DLC it might be better, but we don't even get that. Instead we have to repay for a game we already have just to get a small update. At least something like Mortal Kombat: Komplete Edition let us pay for the DLC instead of buying another disc.

Also, I doubt data carries over between the games so not only do you have to pay $60 for a small update but if you completed Arcade mode and unlocked all the titles and profiles you have to do it all over again.

[TheGameNinja]

It just isn't morally right for them to make you pay for something that you have technically already paid for. They are making you pay for unlockable content. Like if you had to pay every time you unlocked a character in Brawl. If it is on the disc, it should be yours to access.

DLC is not the problem I have with this. DLC is fine. Day one DLC, I don't care. That's all optional. But you paid for that disc, and forcing you to pay to unlock part of the disc is not right.

[jkid101094]

It just isn't morally right for them to make you pay for something that you have technically already paid for. They are making you pay for unlockable content. Like if you had to pay every time you unlocked a character in Brawl. If it is on the disc, it should be yours to access.

DLC is not the problem I have with this. DLC is fine. Day one DLC, I don't care. That's all optional. But you paid for that disc, and forcing you to pay to unlock part of the disc is not right.

I understand what you're talking about but the intention of putting it on the disc is usually for a good cause. It reduces the amount of space that your hard drive needs to use said DLC in the first place. They are not making you pay for unlockable content because you can't actually unlock it. If anything paying for the disc with DLC on it would be the same as paying for said DLC to take nothing off your hard drive. I think that's a pretty fair deal, but I do see where you're coming from.

What needs to be done is the ability to store DLC on something like a CD or a flash drive. I'm sure they could lock the files so they couldn't be redistributed and it would get rid of both, "on-disc DLC" and it would save hard drive space. Hell, Nintendo does it.